Group items tagged

Nuclear power plants are being pushed as part of climate-change legislation. But the focus should be on renewable power sources, which are getting cheaper and don't produce radioactive waste. As the Senate debates climate legislation that could reinvent the country's energy infrastructure, it is richly ironic that lawmakers who consider themselves rock-ribbed fiscal conservatives are among the strongest backers of nuclear plants -- a vastly expensive, inefficient and dangerous source of energy that requires massive taxpayer bailouts. Senate Republicans and many moderate Democrats are seeking to lard up prospective climate and energy bills with billions of dollars in loan guarantees and other subsidies for nuclear power, even though it makes no sense as a solution to climate change and is a terrible option from an economic, environmental and national-security standpoint. Sens. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), whose bipartisan effort to restructure the cap-and-trade climate bill (which Republicans like to deride as "cap and tax") offers its only hope of passage in the Senate this year, signaled their intent to add more nuclear pork to the bill in a recent Op-Ed article. Meanwhile, Sens. Jim Webb (D-Va.) and Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) recently introduced their own alternative climate bill calling for up to $100 billion in clean-energy loan guarantees, most of which would end up going to nuclear plants.

Nuclear power plants are being pushed as part of climate-change legislation. But the focus should be on renewable power sources, which are getting cheaper and don't produce radioactive waste. As the Senate debates climate legislation that could reinvent the country's energy infrastructure, it is richly ironic that lawmakers who consider themselves rock-ribbed fiscal conservatives are among the strongest backers of nuclear plants -- a vastly expensive, inefficient and dangerous source of energy that requires massive taxpayer bailouts. Senate Republicans and many moderate Democrats are seeking to lard up prospective climate and energy bills with billions of dollars in loan guarantees and other subsidies for nuclear power, even though it makes no sense as a solution to climate change and is a terrible option from an economic, environmental and national-security standpoint. Sens. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), whose bipartisan effort to restructure the cap-and-trade climate bill (which Republicans like to deride as "cap and tax") offers its only hope of passage in the Senate this year, signaled their intent to add more nuclear pork to the bill in a recent Op-Ed article. Meanwhile, Sens. Jim Webb (D-Va.) and Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) recently introduced their own alternative climate bill calling for up to $100 billion in clean-energy loan guarantees, most of which would end up going to nuclear plants.

The Indiana lawmakers are considering legislation that would define "clean coal" and nuclear-generated electricity as renewable energy. They're also mulling bills that would define John "Cougar" Mellencamp as a jazz musician and categorize the pork tenderloin sandwich as a vegetable. Seriously, the energy change, being debated as part of a set of changes to the state's electricity laws, would allow nuclear and clean coal electricity to qualify for state renewable energy funding incentives. And it would let them count toward a renewable electricity standard -also under consideration in the statehouse-that would require Indiana utilities to produce 15 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2025.

"President Barack Obama's efforts to lure climate change votes by embracing nuclear power are drawing fire from both the left and the right. Environmental groups are leery of using federal funds to subsidize nuclear power plants, arguing that they can be risky investments. "Increasing loan guarantees for nuclear power beyond what Congress already has authorized would shift unacceptable risks from the nuclear industry to U.S. taxpayers," said Ellen Vancko, nuclear energy and climate change project manager at the Union of Concerned Scientists. "This is a prime example of pork-barrel politics on behalf of special interests." "

"The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) today leveled criticism at an expected Obama administration announcement that it will significantly boost federal loan guarantees for new nuclear power plants. The Wall Street Journal reported today that the Obama administration plans to triple federal loan guarantees for new nuclear reactors, from $18.5 billion to $54 billion. Ellen Vancko, nuclear energy and climate change project manager at UCS, said "increasing loan guarantees for nuclear power beyond what Congress already has authorized would shift unacceptable risks from the nuclear industry to U.S. taxpayers. This is a prime example of pork barrel politics on behalf of special interests." "

Senior members of the state Washington delegation, Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu, Republican Sen. David Vitter and Shreveport Republican 4th District congressman Jim McCrery, have jointly asked the Secretary of the Air Force to enlarge Barksdale's nuclear role. The three have written Secretary Michael Donley asking that the base, now home to the nation's largest concentration of strategic bombers, be named the headquarters of a new command that will marshal the service's nuclear-armed bombers and missiles, the result of changes service leaders announced following their CORONA Fall meeting in Colorado at the start of the month.

Most new large U.S. Navy amphibious assault ships would be required to be nuclear powered under the National Defense Authorization Act for 2009 which the House of Representatives has passed by a vote of 384 to 23. It now goes to the Senate where many senators are uneasy about the scheme as is the Navy and the shipbuilding industry in the U.S.

Once your power source has reached, say, 10 percent of the electricity grid, let alone 20 percent, it should be time to cut the cord to government funding.