Clean Energy Insight - Moving Energy Forward

[Approx. Read Time: 3 minutes]

The Washington Capitals, an NHL hockey team, endorsed nuclear power today.  Through an endorsement from the Nuclear Energy Institute, the Caps will attempt to share the importance that nuclear energy has with respect to emission-free energy generation.  The endorsement showcases the great work and increased spending from the NEI in the past year to educate the American public on the benefits of nuclear power as a clean, safe, and reliable form of energy for the country.  Now, if only the Capitol (rather than the Capitals) will choose to fully endorse nuclear power.  Although, this is a great start.  You can check out the interesting details of the endorsement below.

NEI Partners with NHL’s Washington Capitals to Promote Nuclear Energy’s Clean-Air Value

WASHINGTON, Sept. 30 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — To increase awareness of nuclear energy’s role in clean-air electricity generation, the Nuclear Energy Institute has entered into its first-ever partnership with the Washington Capitals of the National Hockey League. As an official energy partner of the Capitals, NEI is teaming up with the team to promote the clean-air benefits of nuclear energy to sports fans via multiple media, including signage at the Capitals’ home arena, the Verizon Center, in print and radio ads, and on the Caps’ and NEI’s Web sites.

Hockey and climate change may seem unrelated, but a rising concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is, many believe, creating changes in the climate–changes that are having an impact on hockey. From Vancouver to Vermont, Stockholm to Moscow, the ponds and lakes on which many hockey players hone their skills are freezing later in the year and melting sooner.

“Nuclear energy is an important part of a technology-based solution to climate change,” said Capitals majority owner Ted Leonsis. “It’s a proven energy provider in Virginia and Maryland for Capitals’ fans. We are pleased to work with NEI to raise awareness of the role that it can play in reducing greenhouses gases across America.”

The Washington region has long benefitted from nuclear energy’s clean, reliable electricity generation: Nuclear power plants do not emit greenhouse gases or other controlled air pollutants while generating electricity. For local Caps’ fans, 85 percent of the clean electricity produced in Maryland comes from the Calvert Cliffs nuclear plant located 45 miles from Verizon Center. In Virginia, nuclear energy produces 91 percent of the state’s emission-free power.

Additionally, Baltimore-based Constellation Energy and Richmond-based Dominion Power are among energy companies that have filed permits with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to build new nuclear energy facilities.

“The Capitals’ success here in Washington provides a terrific branding opportunity for the industry as Congress and the Obama administration tackle important energy and environmental issues, all of which will benefit from America’s investment in nuclear energy,” said Scott Peterson, NEI’s vice president of communications.

Nuclear energy is the largest generator of clean-air electricity with 104 reactors in 31 states generating 20 percent of all electricity and 72 percent of electricity produced from sources that do not produce greenhouse gases. For many U.S. energy companies, nuclear energy is a vital part of a clean energy production portfolio that also includes wind, solar and hydroelectric power.

Like the energy sector, NHL players are increasingly serious about climate change. The NHL Players Association has helped its membership calculate their total carbon emissions for the regular season. Hockey players are uniquely qualified to comment on the demonstrable effects of climate change.

“A rite of winter passage among generations of hockey players–playing and falling in love with the game out on frozen ponds and lakes–has been curtailed as warmer winters in recent years have meant less access to skating recreation,” Peterson noted. “A lot of people associated with hockey believe this is due to climate change.”

Capitals’ fans this hockey season will see NEI’s “Nuclear: Clean Air Energy” message prominently displayed near the goal both at the Verizon Center in Washington, D.C., as well at the team’s training facility, Kettler Capitals Iceplex, in Arlington, Va. NEI also will air 30-second radio commercials during coverage of all 82 games on local radio WFED 1500 AM. NEI also will have video and display ads on the Capitals’ Web site and full-page advertisements in the game programs.

All season long, NEI will provide updated information on nuclear energy’s role in moving America to a more climate-friendly energy portfolio for Washington Capitals fans at http://nei.org/caps. To view partnership-related photographs, including shots of the Capitals in action, throughout the season, see NEI’s Flickr account at http://www.flickr.com/photos/_nei/.

[Approx. Read Time: 4 minutes (Bold: 1 minute)]

NEI President and CEO Marvin Fertel recently wrote the following Op-ed at The Hill outlining legislation must-haves in order for the expansion of nuclear power to occur in the United States.  Fertel creates a nuclear industry wish-list of policy and legislation changes that he feels must be made.  If Fertel’s policy suggestions were implemented in such legislation as the Waxman-Markey Cap-and-Trade bill, nuclear power will be able to create jobs, clean baseload energy, and economic benefits a lot sooner than currently projected.  I’ve bolded the important stuff to save you time.  Enjoy.

Nuclear power poised to help meet demands of climate change legislation

By Marvin Fertel - 09/08/09 PM ET

More than a century ago, the famed journalist and writer Ambrose Bierce stated, “Electricity seems destined to play a most important part in the arts and industries. The question of its economical application to some purposes is still unsettled, but experiment has already proved that it will propel a streetcar better than a gas.”

Bierce’s prediction is staggering in its understatement.

Today, the electric power sector is a $340 billion industry that employs approximately 400,000 workers and constitutes 3 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product. Electricity’s reach, of course, has long since eclipsed streetcars. It propels virtually the entire economy and is so vital that there is a discernible statistical correlation between a nation’s reliability of electricity supply and its mortality rate.

Electricity has long since become an inextricable part of our lives. Even with improved efficiency measures, our nation’s need for electricity — including reliable, carbon-free sources such as nuclear power plants — continues to climb.

A host of recent analyses has concluded that the nation’s use of nuclear energy must increase in the coming decades to meet rising electricity demand while reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, in its analysis of the Waxman-Markey climate change bill, found that the contribution of low- or zero-carbon energy technologies to electricity supply must increase to 38 percent by 2050 from the current 14 percent. An additional 180 nuclear power plants (104 operate today) will be needed to meet the legislation’s emissions targets, the EPA said.

Similarly, the National Academy of Sciences concluded in its July report “America’s Energy Future” that “(S)ubstantial reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from the electricity sector are achievable over the next two to three decades through a portfolio approach” that includes nuclear energy. The report identifies advanced nuclear energy plants as one of two “key technologies” that must be demonstrated during the next decade “to allow for their widespread deployment starting around 2020.”

At present, 25 new reactors are in the federal permitting process, with four to eight plants expected to be completed by 2017. The industry plans to invest $8 billion in just the next few years — on top of billions already spent — to be in a position to start construction of carbon-free nuclear plants in 2011-2012.

Nuclear energy and other clean energy technologies can help jumpstart our economy and make America a world leader in low-carbon energy. American manufacturers will benefit because construction of new nuclear power plants will create demand for thousands of components and commodities like concrete and steel.

Nuclear energy’s good-paying, long-term employment opportunities already are helping to fuel a transition in America’s energy landscape. The nuclear energy industry is one of the few bright spots in the U.S. economy — expanding rather than contracting in communities like Chattanooga, Tenn.; Newport News, Va.; Cheswick, Pa.; and Lake Charles, La.

As the Southern Legislative Conference of the Council of State Governments stated in a pro-nuclear resolution it adopted unanimously in August, “Clean nuclear energy is an engine for economic growth.” Construction of a new reactor by itself constitutes four years of employment for as many as 2,400 skilled craft workers, with 400 to 700 permanent jobs once the plant starts operating.

No single technology can independently slow and reverse increases in carbon emissions. But these studies confirm nuclear energy is an indispensable part of a comprehensive approach that, thankfully, is identified in energy and climate change bills pending in Congress.

Provisions in the House and Senate bills are necessary if nuclear energy is to expand at the level necessary to meet both electricity demand and reductions in greenhouse gases.

The legislation in both chambers would establish a Clean Energy Deployment Administration, which would function as a permanent financing platform to provide loans, loan guarantees and other credit support for clean-energy technologies, including new nuclear power plants, wind and biomass.

Congress should approve additional policy elements that will speed the transition to advanced reactors and help meet near- to mid-term carbon reduction goals. These include:

• Ensuring that the volume of loan guarantees available for new reactors is comparable to other carbon-free electricity sources and refining the Department of Energy loan guarantee program in key areas that are slowing implementation of the program;
  
• Providing new tax stimulus for investment in new nuclear energy facilities, new nuclear component manufacturing and workforce development;
  
• Expanding the existing production tax credit to all new reactors that produce electricity by 2021;
  
• Reducing the time to market for advanced reactors to six years from nine to 10 years by enacting clarifications to ensure that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s licensing process works as intended; and
  
• Mandating creation of a blue ribbon commission to re-examine management options for used nuclear fuel, and establishing incentives for state and communities to develop consolidated storage facilities for used nuclear fuel.

America needs a commonsense, balanced approach as we shift toward low-carbon sources of energy. Diversity of clean electricity is essential not just to protecting our environment, but also to promoting energy security and reliability.

Nuclear energy is a proven source that generates one-fifth of U.S. electricity reliably and affordably.

In the coming decades, we will be challenged to simultaneously meet rising electricity demand and reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. To meet this challenge, Congress must establish a comprehensive and sustainable national policy that supports the development of technology-based, zero-carbon solutions like nuclear energy, solar and wind that can be implemented in the near term and are affordable for consumers.

( By Carrington Dillon ) [Approx. Read Time: 6 minutes]

Recently, Senior Vice President of Governmental Affairs for the Nuclear Energy Institute, Alex Flint, offered an extensive update on the current condition of the nuclear industry as well as a forecast for the future.  Mr. Flint addressed the Senate Republican Conference on June 8th, 2009.  We’re a month late with this, but I don’t remember seeing it reported anywhere else (I could be wrong).

Here are some excerpts from Mr. Flint’s prepared exchange:

Addressing nuclear costs, Mr. Flint commented about CWIP and Loan Guarantees:

“In general, U.S. utility companies are not large enough to finance these projects using traditional utility financing schemes – a 50:50 debt:equity structure.

However, there are steps that can be taken to address that challenge.

A number of projects that are regulated by public utility commissioners will be financed using the Construction Work-in-Progress (CWIP) approach in which a company is permitted to recover part of the cost before the plant goes on-line, a concept that is similar to putting a larger down payment on a house.  Such an approach is estimated to result in long-term savings to the consumer of 25 percent.

The DOE loan guarantee program could also significantly reduce interest costs on new plants, making it possible for utilities to order plants, reducing long-term costs to consumers.

It is for that reason that NEI strongly supports reform of the DOE’s Title XVII loan guarantee program and proposals such as the authorization of a Clean Energy Deployment Administration.”

Mr. Flint then addressed job creation and positive economic impacts by the industry:

“It is important to understand the economic significance of constructing 45 nuclear plants.  That effort will generate up to 82,800 construction jobs (with peak employment at 128,800).

These jobs include skilled trades such as welders, pipefitters, masons, carpenters, millwrights, sheet metal workers, electricians, ironworkers, heavy equipment operators, insulators, engineers, project managers, and construction supervisors.

Once built, these 45 plants will generate up to 32,200 high paying permanent fulltime jobs in rural counties where the plants are located.

Each year, each new reactor will generate approximately $430 million in expenditures for goods, services and labor, and through subsequent spending because of the presence of the plant and its employees.

The average nuclear plants also contributes more than $20 million annually to state and local tax revenue, benefiting schools, roads and other state and local infrastructure.  By 2030 these 45 new nuclear plants will be generating over $3.3 billion in annual revenue to the federal government.”

Mr. Flint then lays it all out with his take on the whole Yucca Mountain situation.  This part actually got me pumped up a little bit:

“First, all credible scientific evidence to date suggests that Yucca Mountain is suitable to serve as a geologic repository for spent fuel.

But it is clear that due to political commitments the President made during the campaign, the administration may not support opening the Yucca Mountain repository even if it receives a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Given that the Nuclear Waste Policy Act remains the law of the land, and recognizing the legal and moral obligation that the government has to fulfill its responsibility under that law, the industry believes the NRC’s review of the Yucca Mountain license application should continue.

In parallel, the administration should convene an independent panel of the best scientific, environmental, engineering and public policy leaders to fully investigate the critical issues and make a recommendation to President Obama and Congress on how best to proceed with managing used nuclear fuel.

Given the clear need for expansion of nuclear energy programs in the United States and worldwide, the nuclear industry proposed two years ago that our nation should revisit the decision to use a once-through fuel cycle and instead pursue a closed fuel cycle that includes recycling. This integrated approach includes at-reactor storage, private sector or government-owned centralized storage, research and development on recycling technology and continued development and licensing of a federal repository.

If the administration unilaterally decides to abandon the Yucca Mountain project without enacting new legislation to modify or replace existing law, it should expect a new wave of lawsuits seeking further damage payments as well as likely requests for refunding of at least $22 billion already collected from consumers that has not been spent on the program from the Nuclear Waste Fund. Further, given the uncertain path forward for the Yucca Mountain project and the difficult economic times facing American families and businesses, Energy Secretary Steven Chu should reduce the fee paid by consumers to cover only licensing costs incurred by DOE, NRC and local Nevada government units that provide oversight of the program.”

You should really read the entire speech here.  You can watch it here. It is a great synopsis of the industry, and that’s why I thought it was necessary to post on Clean Energy Insight.  Thanks, Alex.  Keep up the good work.