Yucca Mountain News Clips
Thursday, July 12, 2007
---------------------------
Reno Gazette-Journal
July 12, 2007
Political interference hurts offices' ability to function
Editorial
Reno Gazette-Journal
Nevadans shouldn't be surprised at the former surgeon general's testimony that the White House muzzled him on hot-button political issues.
This is, after all, the president who told the state's residents during the 2000 campaign that a decision on going ahead with the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository would be based on science, and then ignored his promise when he won office with the help of this state's voters.
However, despite the millions of dollars that already have been spent on the Yucca Mountain project, it has always been more about politics than science. Politics trumped science early in the process, when Congress voted, over the protests of Nevada's leaders, to eliminate potential sites for the waste dump in Arizona and Louisiana to concentrate on Yucca Mountain in Nevada, which could muster little political support in Congress.
Since then, both Democratic and Republican administrations have forged ahead with the plan to move the waste from the nation's nuclear power plants -- none located in Nevada -- to the mountain north of Las Vegas. Even accusations that contractors falsified important data and a judge's ruling that standards for the repository had no basis in science were unable to stop the project.
Why, then, should anyone be surprised by former Surgeon General Dr. Richard Carmona's testimony on Tuesday that the White House had politicized his office, as it has other offices that deal primarily with science?
Speaking before the House Oversight Committee, Carmona, who served in the office from 2002 to 2006, accused administration officials of censoring his speeches, preventing him from speaking to reporters and telling him to follow administration policy instead of science. (A White House spokesman denied the allegations.) He also said that the administration blocked reports or his input on a range of issues, from emergency preparedness to mental health.
He was joined by two other former surgeons general, C. Everett Koop and David Satcher, who said that this administration's efforts went well beyond those experienced in the past.
It should go without saying that politics should have no part in such scientific endeavors. When it becomes clear to the American public that politicians are skewing science to fit their own beliefs and aims, they will lose confidence in those offices and the policies that are recommended.
Sounds a lot like what's happened to Yucca Mountain, doesn't it?
---------------------------
Bay Area Indymedia
July 12, 2007
Anti-Nculear Activist and Spritual Leader Corbin Harney Passes Away
by Christina Aanestad
Corbin Harney, spiritual leader of the Western Shoshone passed away yesterday of cancer, on Turtle Island, Santa Rosa, California. Harney led the successful resistence to stop the Divine Strake, a nuclear testing plan on Shoshone Lands in Nevada earlier this year.
“My name is Corbin Harney, I’m a Shoshone Indian. I invite each and every one of you on the Shoshone land. Let’s all unite ourself toether and stop this nonsence of what our government is doing to us. Together we can change the direction of what our nuclear energy department is doing. If they want to continue using it why don’t they bury in their own back yards? This is why I ask you people to come out here. This is something that you have to do, you have to decide. Think about the younger people, think about the plant life, the animal life, and so forth. Let’s enjoy them so they can enjoy us. Let’s work together as one people. Thank you.”
That was the voice of Corbin Harney, Spiritual Leader of the Western Shoshone Nation, who passed away today from cancer. He had dedicated his life to fighting nuclear testing and dumping. In 1994, Harney established the Shundahai Network to respond to spiritual and environmental concerns of nuclear issues. Harney also established Poo Ha Bah, a native healing center located in Tecopa Springs, California. Julie Ann Fischer is an attorney with the Western Shoshone Defense Project and personal friend of Harney’s.
“His push for people to understand and to relearn traditional ways of living and to relearn traditional indigenous ways of respecting the earth and the sacred elements of the earth, especially the water and the air-these were real core components of all his life’s work, because without the land, the air, the wate, there would be no life.”
Over his lifetime, Corbin Harney traveled around the world as a speaker, healer and spiritual leader with an environmental and spiritual message. He received numerous national and international awards and spoke before the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland. Corbin also authored two books: “The Way It Is: One Water, One Air, One Earth” and a forthcoming book, “The Nature Way”. A public statement by Harney’s family says “he will be missed but always honored for his work and dedication to traditional ways.”
Comments:
Correction to Article regarding Corvbin Harney's death
by Treva Hearne
Your article incorrectly identifies Julie Fisher (sic), whose name is Julie Fischel, ad being "an atoorney with the Western Shoshone Defense Project." Ms. Fischel is not an attorney in any State, and has never held an active license to practice law in any State at any time since becoming affiliated with the Western Shoshone. She has been directed by the Western Shoshone national Council to stop holding herself out as an attorney, and the Western Shoshone National Council has made clear that it does not condone the misrepresentation of Ms. Fischel's status as an alleged attorney since she is in fact not an attorney.
---------------------------
Reno Gazette-Journal
July 12, 2007
Shoshone, Paiute elder dies
Geralda Miller
Reno Gazette-Journal
Corbin Harney, an elder and spiritual leader of the Western Shoshone and Paiute people and internationally known anti-nuclear activist, has died.
Harney died of complications with cancer Tuesday morning on a sacred mountain near Santa Rosa, Calif., his family said in a written statement. He was 87.
His work on environmental justice issues and spiritual teachings is being remembered by those who knew him.
"Corbin was one of the most revered and respected spiritual leaders of the Western Shoshone and Paiute people of the Great Basin," said Norm Harry, former tribal chairman of the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe. "Corbin's presence will certainly be missed by all who knew him. But his work and teachings will continue."
"We have truly lost a lot," said Harney's nephew, Santiago Lozada, who was with him when he died.
"Corbin was a World War II veteran and was known around the world for his activism against radioactivity and nuclear weapons," said Robert Hager, a Reno-based lawyer for the Western Shoshone tribe. "He's irreplaceable to the Western Shoshone nation."
His activism included leading prayer services and demonstrations at Yucca Mountain and the Nevada nuclear test site and singing songs at the United Nations in Geneva.
In 2003, he was awarded the Nuclear-Free Future Award, an international award for opposition to nuclear arms and atomic energy.
In 1994, Harney founded the Shundahai Network, an organization meant to guarantee that American Indian issues and voices are heard. He also founded Poo Ha Bah, a traditional healing center outside of Death Valley, Calif.
"Corbin was not only one of the most powerful spiritual leaders in the world, but a dear friend to all of us," said Bob Fulkerson, state director for the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada.
Harry said Harney was a mentor who shared his vision for healing Mother Earth.
"The one thing he always stressed to me and it struck with me was, as native people, we can't stand alone and we have to ask others to assist with the healing process," Harry said.
Harney was a member of the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes of Duck Valley but had not lived in the area for several years, said Ted Howard, the tribe's cultural resources director.
In the American Indian tradition, Howard said Harney had "done his part and it was time for him to move on."
"In our beliefs, he crossed into the spirit world and we will see him again," Howard said. "He now is one of those spirits that we summon for strength and direction. Even though the body is gone the spirit lives on."
The family is completing funeral plans, but a sunrise burial service will be Monday in the Battle Mountain Indian Community, where his wife, Marge, is buried.
He is survived by a daughter, two granddaughters, four grandsons, seven great-grandchildren and two great-great grandchildren.
With wire service reports.
---------------------------
Las Vegas Review-Journal
Jul. 11, 2007
Western Shoshone leader dies at 87
Harney fought nuclear tests, Yucca Mountain
By Keith Rogers
Review-Journal
For decades, Corbin Harney was a fixture at anti-nuclear rallies advocating for peace and protection of "Mother Earth," especially his native land, Newe Sogobia, which stretched across a wide swath of what became Nevada.
On Tuesday, Harney, spiritual leader of the Western Shoshones, died of complications from cancer in a rural area of Santa Rosa, Calif., his family and friends said. He was 87.
"We have truly lost a lot," said his nephew, Santiago Lozada, who was at his side when died.
"He was an incredible man who touched a lot of people throughout the world and throughout the country," Lozada said. "It was hard to stay strong."
Julie Fishel, Harney's friend at the Western Shoshone Defense Project, said, "Corbin passed in the way he was supposed to. He was with family and friends. He was comfortable. We had golden eagles circling this place after he passed away."
In Lee, Nev., where friends and family members will gather for a three-day wake 22 miles south of Elko, Harney's cousin Larson Bill recalled how "he was always out there speaking about the wrongs the government did to the Shoshone people."
"He talked about Mother Earth, plant life, bird life, fish life. They're all connected. The land, everything has life to it. Plants and rocks, they have a spirit," Bill said.
"One of the things he hated to see was using the Shoshone land for testing weapons of mass destruction. He didn't believe in that," he said.
Bill said his cousin recently had traveled to Northern California from the Poo Ha Bah healing center Harney had founded in Tecopa, Calif.
"He went to Santa Rosa to finish up his book. ... I think he pretty much knew he was going to go, but he wanted to get a lot of things done before he went," Bill said.
Ian Zabarte, secretary of state for the Western Shoshone National Council, said Harney "was always steadfast in trying to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons and guard the people against the threats and hazards that nuclear technology poses.
"He did that right up to the end despite everything else," Zabarte said.
Harney was born March 24, 1920, in Little Valley, Idaho. He spent much of his life in Nevada and was among the leaders of the anti-nuclear movement that drew thousands of protesters to Peace Camp, outside the Mercury entrance to the Nevada Test Site.
From 1986 through 1994, two years after the United States put full-scale nuclear weapons testing on hold indefinitely, at least 536 demonstrations were held at the test site involving 37,488 participants and 15,740 arrests, according to government records.
After the demonstrations, held by the American Peace Test, Harney through the Shundahai Network continued to protest the government's continued nuclear weapons work and effort to put a repository for highly radioactive waste adjacent to the test site at Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
He backed opposition to the Yucca Mountain project by Citizen Alert, a statewide environmental group, and once described the mountain as a snake that's constantly moving. "Underneath, hot water is going to cause a lot of friction in that tunnel," he warned in 2001.
Six years later, the Department of Energy has yet to submit a license application for the planned repository to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission though Congress approved the project over then-Gov. Kenny Guinn's veto of it in 2002.
In a 1998 protest, Western Shoshones supported by hundreds of protesters erected a tepee beyond the entrance to the test site. Harney issued a statement saying the Shoshones "were put here by the creator as a native people to take care of this land and all the life on it.
"Shoshone people have taken care of this land for thousands of years," he said. "The government has stole this land from us, and now it is very contaminated. For 50 years they have kept us out with fences and guards."
In 2000, Harney continued to condemn the government's actions, particularly the Department of Energy for conducting subcritical nuclear experiments at the test site, saying, "It is with blatant disrespect that the DOE continues to violate our Mother Earth as well as disregard the Treaty of Ruby Valley."
More recently, at a public meeting in Amargosa Valley in 2005, Harney questioned the integrity of the Environmental Protection Agency's proposed 10,000-year and 1 million-year radiation safety standards for the Yucca Mountain site, saying, "I want to know for sure if we're going to tell the truth. We cannot be telling each other fibs."
The truth "from the beginning," he once said, is that "the people are going to have to wake up to the problem and get a cleaner source of power, wind or solar, that doesn't have waste."
Harney traveled around the world as a speaker and environmentalist. He received national and international awards and spoke before the United Nations in Geneva.
He authored two books, "The Way It Is: One Water, One Air, One Earth" and "The Nature Way," soon to be released.
Fishel said that before Harney died, he said, "We are one people. We cannot separate ourselves now. There are many good things to be done for our people and for the world. ... It is important to teach the younger generation so that things are not lost."
The family is finalizing funeral plans, but burial services will be at Battle Mountain Indian Community, where his wife, Marge, is buried.
He is survived by his daughter, Reynaulda Taylor; two granddaughters, four grandsons; seven great-grandchildren; two great-great grandchildren; and the family of his sister, Rosie Blossom.
---------------------------
Bradenton Herald
July 09, 2007
Panel: Fla. should lead in reprocessing spent nuclear fuel
By David Royse
Associated Press Writer
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. --Florida should consider building more nuclear power plants and even contemplate constructing a facility that would recycle nuclear waste into usable fuel, a panel examining the state's energy future says.
The committee will likely recommend that nuclear be a big part of that future, in light of concerns about coal contributing to global warming.
Volatile spikes in the price of natural gas and concerns about carbon emissions from coal plants are driving a renewed interest in nuclear power across the nation, and Florida should also be moving in that direction, several members of the Florida Energy Commission said Monday.
One of the obstacles to building more nuclear power plants is the question of what to do with the spent fuel. Currently, much of that waste is set to eventually be taken to the national Yucca Mountain Repository in Nevada, but it won't hold it all. There's also opposition to storing it there that may pose problems for that plan.
Last year, the Bush administration proposed reviving nuclear fuel reprocessing. Recycling used fuel, which contains 90 percent of its original energy after one use, can reduce waste.
"Do we want to put (the waste) into salt mines for eternity or do we want to make use of it as a fuel?" said J. Sam Bell, chairman of the Florida Energy Commission's advisory committee on energy supply. The panel will recommend changes to the commission, which in turn will make suggestions to the Legislature.
The United States stopped reprocessing nuclear waste in the 1970s because that also produces a plutonium that's nearer to weapons grade, raising fears that widespread reprocessing could increase the risks of nuclear terrorism or proliferation of nuclear weapons.
Several members of the panel said knowledge about the reprocessing technology is lacking, so it needs to be studied more before committing Florida to taking a leading role.
Along with security concerns, some environmental and other groups have questioned whether reprocessing is a legitimate answer to the nuclear waste problem, noting that it is expensive and still leaves waste that must be disposed of.
What to do with the safety, security and waste aren't the only obstacle to more nuclear plants - there's also the huge capital costs in building them. The last new nuclear plant in the United States, opened in 1996 in Tennessee after 22 years of construction, cost $7 billion.
The panel's discussions also included whether state policy should embrace coal as another option for the state's electric power generating future, a touchy subject considering recent statements by Gov. Charlie Crist that he thinks coal's future is shaky because of global warming. Also, state regulators recently rejected a proposed new coal plant for the state's largest utility, Florida Power & Light, although it was primarily on economic grounds.
Electric industry officials say new technology makes coal much cleaner, and some members of the panel said they hope the state doesn't discount coal entirely - because it's such an abundant and cheap fuel source.
"I think the governor's message is really that he doesn't want any more dirty coal plants," said panel member David Mica. "We've got an awful lot of coal out there.... I just don't know if you can afford to throw coal out of that mix."
---------------------------
OpEdNews
July 09, 2007
Mister Big Nuke Company CEO, We've Gotta Talk...
by Eileen McCabe
If I had a chance to toss back a few beers with the CEO of Xcel or Exelon or Entergy… here’s what I’d say.
So y’all are making some pretty extraordinary profits lately. Even so…
You’ve been required to pay into a money pit for 2 decades. You’re allowed to pass this on to ratepayers, but it’s still impacting your bottom line.
You know and I know Yucca Mountain is never going to open. You are wisely moving forward with on-site storage, and I see good faith efforts being made to work with local communities. You are, of course limited by the NRC regulations which generally don’t see local communities as having a voice in approving or rejecting on-site storage. The growing recognition of the necessity of these facilities is going to be a factor in getting any future plants built, as communities focus on this an environmental risk and terrorist threat. It’s also costing a pretty penny to build the facilities, and of course, you’re still paying into the Waste Fund.
You make regular contributions to senators and congress people, to see that your interests are looked after, and I think you’d have to agree that this money has been well spent. Let’s think about your interests for a moment… In many of the states where you do business, Renewable Portfolio Standards have been passed, which require you to produce a percentage of your power output from renewables. You are meeting this challenge, and already have sizable investments in wind and solar installations. How are these investments looking next to your nuclear holdings? Even with subsidies, and a cap on liability through the Price-Anderson Act, your capital expenses, decommissioning costs, and the volatility of the uranium market must be keeping you up at night. What does it cost to decommission a wind turbine? You can sell the steel for scrap, and actually recover some of your initial outlay.
Let’s stop the bleeding. It’s at best disingenuous, and at worst, theft to keep charging you for Yucca Mountain. It isn’t going to happen. It’s a political stalemate. It’s also a budget drain, since it’s been a long time since the Waste Fund actually covered Yucca Mountain as a line item.
So…
Let’s start lobbying your Senators and representatives to change the Nuclear Waste Policy Act to abolish the Waste Fund. Further, let’s assess what you have paid thus far.
Second, let’s acknowledge the reality that on-site storage is already happening, and has industry approval, and change the Nuclear Waste Policy Act to reflect this.
Third, let’s determine a fair payment back to you for your outlay towards a project the federal government will never be able to deliver.
Fourth, let’s formally shut down Yucca Mountain. Budget for expenses to close down and remediate the site, but take remaining budget amounts and put them towards paying back Waste Fund expenditures.
Fifth, since eliminating the budget line item for Yucca Mountain is probably not going to be enough to pay back the nuclear power companies, we need to figure out another source for these funds. Here’s the catch: we recognize that you need to be made financially whole for your outlay, but some of this funding will have to come from budget lines currently dedicated to subsidies for nuclear power.
Sixth, we both lobby for extending renewable energy credits instead of sunsetting then every couple of years. This will protect your renewable investments, and encourage healthy competition and research and development. Your Return on Investment is much higher from renewables, anyway. The cutting edge is currently held by Denmark, Spain and Japan. As a nation (and a business sector), are we content to surrender the technological upper hand in these growing industries? With more federal investment, The Xcels, Exelons and Entergy’s would be able to compete with the Vestas, Gamesas and Kyoceras in wind and solar.
Fair?
We’ll need to get on the phone to our congress people and committee contacts. I’ll work on the constituent political cover, you work on letting them know it’s in your business interests, and their political interests to move on this.
Chew on this a bit, while I buy the next round.
Eileen is a mother, progressive activist, and nuclear policy advisor with GreenAction Utah, a program of the Blue Sky Institute.
---------------------------
NewsBlaze
July 09, 2007
The Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste and Materials to Meet
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste and Materials (ACNW&M) will meet Tuesday, July 17 through Thursday, July 19, in Rockville, MD, to discuss, among other items, Waste Incidental to Reprocessing (WIR) monitoring activities at the Department of Energy's Idaho National Laboratory and Savannah River sites, a status update of the infiltration studies and modeling at Yucca Mountain, and a review of the Committee's draft White Paper entitled: "Background, Status, and Issues Related to the Regulation of Advanced Spent Nuclear Fuel Recycle Facilities."
Annual and semi-annual briefings by the Offices of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS) and Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) are also scheduled.
The 181st meeting will be held in Room T-2B3 of the NRC's Two White Flint North building at 11545 Rockville Pike. The Tuesday session will run from 8:30 a.m. to 4:45 p.m., and both the Wednesday and Thursday sessions will run from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
For video teleconferencing services, please contact Mr. Theron Brown at 301-415-8066 in advance. The full agenda and transcripts for the meeting can be found at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/acnw/agenda/2007.
All other questions and statements should be directed to Dr. Antonio Dias at 301-415-6805.
---------------------------
Colorado Springs Gazette
July 08, 2007
Our View - Sunday
A better plan
City should get out of energy business
With power demands growing, Colorado Springs Utilities must decide soon which course to take,” The Gazette reported Thursday. “Should the city-owned agency build a coal-fired plant? Buy power from others? Augment traditional sources with wind power? Or all three?”
Hmmmm. Such dilemmas we face when government strays from its proper role and into realms better left to the private sector. But city leaders refuse to seriously consider privatizing our city-owned utility, so it falls to us to come up with longrange plans for running a nearly $1 billion-a-year business. CSU officials are soliciting public input on the subject, as part of the effort to draw up a 20-year Integrated Resource Plan required by federal law. So let’s hear from all you energy industry experts in hiding. Make your preferences known.
Where do you think the natural gas market is headed in the next decade or two? How much does it cost, per kilowatt hour, to power a plant with woody biomass? How will a carbon tax impact ratepayers? How will we meet the latest round of renewable energy production quotas, and the round that will inevitably follow? Maybe we should go with nuclear power, assuming they don’t kill Yucca Mountain. How many acres of solar panels does it take to replace a coal-fired power plant?
For what it’s worth, we would like to see all those “dirty” old power plants shut down and the city powered with thousands of rooftop pinwheels. But don’t be shy about weighing-in with your ideas. It’s our utility, after all, so officials have to take your ruminations seriously. And we’ve got a bunch of amateurs sitting as the Utilities Board/City Council, so your suggestions are as good as any CSU is likely to get.
Whether or not your ideas are connected to reality — are cost-effective, technically feasible and make any practical sense at all — isn’t important. Most of today’s energy policy debate takes place in the Surreal World. The important thing is making your feelings known.
Actually, we don’t know the first thing about drawing up a 20 year energy plan. But we’re in good company, since the City Council/Utilities Board doesn’t know anything about it either. What little they know about these esoteric issues is spoon-fed them by utility insiders, so instead of being a truly independent governing board, they operate as an echo chamber.
Which brings us to our alternative to the 20-year Integrated Resource Plan — something we call the 3-year Utility Re-evaluation and Privatization Plan, which would take these decisions out of the hands of politicians and put them where they belong: in the hands of private sector energy industry professionals.
In year one, City Council commissions an independent study of what CSU is worth and the feasibility of selling it off, in parts or as a whole. In year two, we have a city-wide debate on the pros and cons of privatization, informed by the results of that research, and about how we might steward the windfall that would result from such a sale. In year three we put the issue to a vote of the people and act according to their wishes.
Privatization wouldn’t be without potential complications. But they would probably pale in comparison to the complications we face now, as the amateur owners of a utility company.
The lights would still go on, but making them go on, and keeping them on, would be somebody else’s headache. City Council could focus on more appropriate things. Politics wouldn’t intrude into utility business decisions. And the citizens of Colorado Springs could turn their attention to other matters — such as whether the city’s other “enterprises” might also be privatized.
Brown’s Canyon, taken in context
Salida outfitter and hunter Bill Dvorak gets so upset with off-road vehicle riders who venture into Brown’s Canyon — intruding on what he evidently considers his personal hunting preserve — that he wants to “shoot” them, according to Thursday’s Gazette. He’s just using rhetoric recklessly, we assume, but this selfish and hostile attitude seems all too typical of those who want the canyon declared a federal wilderness area and placed off limits to those who recreate in ways they don’t approve of.
Besides selfishness, there’s obviously a strong element of self-interest motivating self-styled wilderness advocates. As an outfitter who gets paid for trekking people into the backcountry, Dvorak resents the fact that less-affluent hunters can access the area without his assistance. And here’s just one irony in the situation. Dvorak wants to keep the area “pristine” not because he’s a nature worshipper, like many wilderness buffs; he goes there, and takes his clients there, to kill things.
Nothing wrong with that. We strongly support the right of hunters — all hunters — to do their thing in national forests. It’s just interested that a guy who kills animals for fun and profit is complaining because some ATV riders, occasionally passing through his happy hunting grounds, scare the deer.
There’s nothing wrong with this, either. Even some saints are guided by self-interest. But let’s not paint all wilderness backers as high-minded altruists and all wilderness opponents as nature-trampling yahoos. Maintaining the multiple-use mandate on federal lands means balancing competing uses and needs, but one faction in the fight isn’t interested in sharing.
Some people choose to enjoy their public lands one way; others, in other ways. Of late, however, elite recreationists are joining forces with environmental extremists in an effort to exclude those who don’t enjoy the lands in certain “recreationally correct” ways. The push for more “roadless” and wilderness areas is part of that effort.
This coalition will hold together until most “extractive industries” and motorized recreationists have been ousted from federal lands — and until the hard-core greens turn on their erstwhile allies, on the outfitters and the elite hook-and-bullet clubs, and issue them an eviction notice.
---------------------------
Myrtle Beach Sun News
July 08, 2007
Nuclear power jump-started
Costs present main problem for new plants
By Jay Lindsay
The Associated Press
BOSTON --Thanks to global warming, nuclear energy is hot again. Its promise of abundant, carbon emission-free power is being pushed by the president and newly considered by environmentalists. But any expansion won't come cheap or easy.
The enormous obstacles facing nuclear power are the same as they were in 1996, when the nation's last new nuclear plant opened near the Watts Bar reservoir in Tennessee after 22 years of construction and $7 billion in costs.
Waste disposal, safe operation and security remain major concerns, but economics may be the biggest deterrent. Huge capital costs combine into an enormous price tag for would-be investors.
There is also fervent anti-nuke opposition waiting to be re-stoked. Jim Riccio of Greenpeace said nuclear advocates are exploiting global warming fears to try to revive an industry that's too risky to fool with.
"You have better ways to boil water," Riccio said.
But environmentalists aren't in lockstep on the issue. Bill Chameides, chief scientist for Environmental Defense, said anything that helps alleviate global warming must be an energy option.
"I think it's somewhat disingenuous that folks who agree that global warming is such a serious issue could sort of dismiss it out of hand," he said. "It's got to be at least considered."
The U.S. has 104 commercial reactors that supply about 20 percent of the country's power. The Department of Energy projects a 45 percent growth in electricity demand by 2030, meaning 35 to 50 new nuclear plants will be needed by then just to maintain nuclear's share of the energy market, said Scott Peterson of the Nuclear Energy Institute, the industry's chief lobbyist.
That growing demand, not global warming, "has been the single biggest factor in companies looking at building large nuclear plants again," Peterson said.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has been notified that several companies will pursue licenses for up to 33 new reactors, with the first one online in seven years at the earliest.
Earlier this year, projects at existing plants in Illinois and Mississippi received permits for their proposed sites, but it's no guarantee they'll be the first projects completed.
Many of the new plants are proposed in areas that already have existing plants where there is more acceptance of nuclear energy. President Bush visited one of those spots recently when he promoted nuclear energy at the Browns Ferry's Unit 1 reactor in Alabama.
But any major expansion will require selling nuclear in new places, where local opposition may be intense and winning approval may be costly.
"This isn't just a bunch of environmentalists who think this is a bad idea," Riccio said. "It's most people who aren't being paid to think otherwise."
Nuclear power is produced when neutrons split the nucleus of uranium atoms, releasing heat that is used to boil water and produce the steam that drives a plant's turbines. The process is emission-free, and the radioactive waste is contained inside the plant.
The waste is stored at individual plants, awaiting permanent transfer to the national Yucca Mountain Repository in Nevada. But Yucca Mountain has faced stiff opposition and won't open until the early 2020s at the earliest. By then, it will be too small to hold the waste produced nationally.
Recycling used fuel, which contains 90 percent of its original energy after one use, can reduce waste. "Reprocessing" also produces a plutonium that's nearer to weapons grade, raising fears that widespread reprocessing could increase the risks of nuclear proliferation.
Nuclear energy critics also see the plants themselves as devastating terrorist targets - "predeployed nuclear weapons," as Paul Gunter of the anti-nuclear Nuclear Information and Resource Service calls them.
While opponents fear catastrophe, money may be what kills a nuclear revival. Peterson estimates each new plant will cost about $3 billion, but the industry has a history of construction delays and cost overruns.
The 2005 energy bill passed by Congress provides subsidies for the first six plants, which the industry sees as a one-time "jump start," Peterson said.
"If we can't be competitive after those first few reactors, then companies will stop building them," he said. "No one is building nuclear plants because they have a religious belief in nuclear."
The industry hopes new standardized plant designs will help control costs by taking advantage of cheaper, offsite modular construction. Standardization could also allow plants to share parts and work crews, Peterson said.
He said the new designs are also safer because they incorporate the lessons of Three Mile Island, which had a partial meltdown in 1979 after workers misread a valve and mistakenly thought cooling water was getting into the reactor.
The new systems have fewer valves and less piping, relying primarily on gravity to deliver cooling water to the reactor.
Peterson said the industry has proven it can safely store its waste, and will be able to do so until Yucca Mountain is open. Nuclear plants also have elaborate security, including heavily armed guards trained to deal with various attack scenarios, including multiple truck bombings and suicide attack by wide-bodied airplane, similar to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Peterson said.
Patrick Moore, a Greenpeace co-founder who's become a fervent nuclear energy advocate and industry consultant, said the industry needs to prepare for such worst-case scenarios, but those shouldn't drive the debate over nuclear energy.
Moore said his former environmentalist allies, some of whom now deride him as a corporate shill, are stuck in a Cold War mentality that lumps together the benefits and dangers of nuclear technology.
"You don't ban the beneficial uses of a technology just because that same technology can be used for evil," he said. "Otherwise we would never have harnessed fire."
Chameides of Environmental Defense said he thinks nuclear power is safe and that the waste problem has a technical solution, but he needs convincing to endorse a nuclear resurgence. He's waiting to see the industry move aggressively to address concerns about waste and security. He's also skeptical the nuclear industry can survive without continued subsidies, which he opposes.
"I'm a scientist, not an economist," Chameides added. "I'm willing to possibly be wrong."
---------------------------
Allentown Morning Call
July 08, 2007
Power to the people
Citizens' group files concerns about PPL plan to expand Susquehanna nuclear plant.
By Sam Kennedy
The Morning Call
A third nuclear reactor threatens to leave a legacy of radioactive waste, suck up too much river water and depress the local economy, according to the first substantive response to PPL Corp.'s proposal to expand its Susquehanna plant.
Last month, the Allentown energy company sent a letter informing the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission it might apply for a license for a third reactor about 75 miles northwest of the Lehigh Valley. Such an application would be the first from Pennsylvania since the state became, with the meltdown of a reactor at the Three Mile Island power plant in 1979, the place where the nation's rapid nuclear expansion came to a sudden halt.
News of PPL's Susquehanna proposal was met immediately by opposition from several environmental and watchdog groups. One, Three Mile Island Alert, which is based in Harrisburg and monitors the three nuclear power plants on the Susquehanna river, has now put its concerns into writing.
A paper titled ''Why Susquehanna 3 Is a Bad Idea'' opens with the very question that has flummoxed the federal government for decades: What to do with radioactive waste?
''The plant currently generates 60 metric tons of nuclear waste annually,'' writes Eric Epstein, longtime chairman of 500-member TMI Alert. ''It's anybody's guess what the final cleanup tab will be … or if the nuclear garbage will even have a forwarding address.''
PPL's Susquehanna plant is in Salem Township, Luzerne County, near Berwick. The Lehigh Valley is outside the 50-mile radius considered most at risk to radioactive contamination in the event of an accident.
In its current two-reactor configuration, the plant is already PPL's biggest generator. It puts out 2,360 megawatts -- enough to power 2 million homes -- of PPL's 11,000 megawatts of capacity nationwide.
For its part, the government has agreed to bury all the nation's nuclear waste under a 13-million-year-old volcanic ridge, called Yucca Mountain, in Nevada. But the plan has been stymied by a host of environmental concerns, as well as fierce opposition from people who live in the vicinity of the mountain.
The impasse has left nuclear plants with no alternative but storing their radioactive waste on-site. Since 1999, the Susquehanna plant's used uranium has been kept in huge steel containers, which are locked inside concrete bunkers.
In a written rebuttal to TMI Alert, PPL says, ''PPL operates the Susquehanna plant safely and within all local, state and federal regulations.'' A company spokesman later elaborated on the nuclear waste issue.
''It's not like we don't have a plan, because we certainly do,'' PPL Susquehanna community relations manager Lou Ramos said. The plan he was referring to is Yucca Mountain.
He said PPL, along with other nuclear power plant operators, have a contract with the government. They've contributed a total of $27 billion to the project since 1981, he said.
''There's no reason why it can't work,'' Ramos said. ''You gotta believe -- and we certainly do -- that Yucca Mountain will be opened.''
A third reactor could also magnify the cost of cleaning up the Susquehanna plant after it closes sometime in the future, according to the TMI Alert paper. In it, Epstein says that the projected costs of decommissioning the plant have increased ''wildly,'' from as little as $135 million in 1981 to $936 million in 2005.
PPL says that decommissioning funds have been set aside in a trustee account. Currently, there is $550,000, which is expected to grow to more than $1 billion by 2024, according to the company.
Additional funds would be set aside for a third reactor, PPL says.
Water consumption is another major focus of TMI Alert's paper. According to Epstein, the Susquehanna plant takes 30 million gallons from the Susquehanna River every day.
''Last year, despite the fact that Columbia County was 3.6 inches below normal precipitation and Luzerne County was 3.2 inches under … SSES continued to gobble up water,'' he writes, using the acronym for the plant's formal name, Susquehanna Steam Electric Station. ''SSES is a large industrial consumer of a valuable and limited commodity.''
PPL gives a much different account: ''As a good neighbor, SSES took … voluntary steps to conserve water during the recent droughts.''
In its rebuttal, the company argues that the plant's water consumption is regulated by the Susquehanna River Basin Commission, and that the amount of water it uses represents a tiny fraction of the river's flow. It puts the figure at six-tenths of 1 percent of the average daily flow.
PPL also says that the plant uses water from the Cowaneque Lake Reservoir to augment river flow, and that it has an 8-acre, 25-million-gallon pond that serves as the main source of water for the plant's safety systems.
TMI Alert's paper also raises questions about the potential economic impact a third reactor would have on the economy, particularly on Luzerne County's aging population. The general thrust of Epstein's argument is that the Susquehanna plant has had a negative effect on the surrounding region's property values and tax base. He also suggests that PPL, along with other nuclear power plant operators in the state, have played accounting tricks.
With deregulation of the energy industry, he writes, ''they claimed that their generating stations had depreciated overnight and were only worth a fraction of pre-deregulation estimates.''
PPL maintains that ''the company pays its taxes on fair valuation,'' and that ''the local taxing jurisdictions are collecting more property tax on the Susquehanna plant than they did prior to deregulation.''
''The continued operation of SSES thus benefits both taxpayers and ratepayers,'' the company's rebuttal concludes.
PPL is not alone in its interest to build a nuclear reactor. In recent years, as the price of fossil fuel has risen and the full extent of its environmental costs has become clear, there has been a resurgence of support for nuclear energy, especially within the energy industry itself. Nuclear energy, unlike oil, natural gas and coal, doesn't release global-warming pollutants into the atmosphere.
The letter the PPL sent to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission last month was the 20th such notification of nuclear plans the agency has received since 2005. Like the Susquehanna proposal, most of those involve building reactors at existing nuclear plants.
The letter does not mean PPL has actually decided to build another reactor, according to the company. Rather, it is a move to preserve that option for the future.
The earliest a new reactor could come online, after regulatory review and con struction, is 2015.
Three Mile Island Alert
What: A watchdog group based in Harrisburg. It monitors the three nuclear power plants on the Susquehanna River.
Founded: 1977
Membership: about 500
Web site: http://www.tmia.com
Chairman: Eric Epstein, 47, Harrisburg
"We view our role as making sure that nuclear plants are operated safely, are adequately staffed and pay their fair share of taxes," Epstein said. "We are pro-community. The plants are going to be part of the community for the indefinite future. We understand that's the reality."
--sam.kennedy@mcall.com, 610-820-6517
---------------------------
The Republican
July 08, 2007
Editorial:
Making old seem new is part of power play
The promise of a way to generate energy without emissions has some environmental advocates looking seriously at backing the method. After all, making electric power without contributing to global warming would seem to be the stuff of science fiction.
And that's the problem. The method in question is nuclear power. And while it doesn't produce the harmful gases that are spewed into the atmosphere by old-fashioned coal-burning power plants, atomic power presents an entirely separate series of problems. Remember Three Mile Island? How about Chernobyl?
Nonetheless, there are some who are looking past the specter of nuclear power and seeing nothing but clear skies ahead. While we understand the impulse, we would urge extreme caution. Followed by some more caution.
Nuclear proponents say that today's atomic power plants would be far safer than the ones of yore. To that, we say maybe. And that safer may still not be safe enough.
It's notable that some environmentalists have been actively taking up the atomic cause. While we are not suggesting that you are likely to see someone sporting a "Go Nukes" T-shirt in the granola isle of your local supermarket anytime soon, nuclear power is now being discussed in circles where such talk would recently have been unthinkable.
This, of course, is largely a reflection of the growing concerns over global warming.
But down the road just a short distance there are perils aplenty. As things stand now, there is nuclear waste - dangerous, radioactive spent nuclear fuel - stored at sites across the land. In our own region, there is nuclear waste held on site at the decommissioned nuke plant in Rowe. Plans to store all of the nation's waste in one place - beneath Yucca Mountain in Nevada - may never move forward. And that may well be for the best.
With so many uncertainties, talk of new nukes should not get off the drawing board.
---------------------------
Pahrump Valley Times
July 07, 2007
Nye County envisions Gateway entry to Yucca
By Mark Waite
PVT
The Gateway Center, a conceptual, multi-phased plan for encouraging industrial and commercial development at the entrance to the proposed Yucca Mountain Project was unveiled last month.
The seven-phase concept, taking in nine sections of land, is intended to serve as a planning guide for Nye County and the U.S. Department of Energy. It includes proposed office parks, research parks, a 435-acre contractors lay down yard, warehousing space, visitors center, a renewable energy park and 1,375 acres of development reserves at the southernmost part that are excluded from residential development.
Nye County consultant Mary Ellen Giampaoli states the Gateway plan is consistent with the Nuclear Waste Policy, as mitigation for the expected impacts of Yucca Mountain. The industrial development would help ensure ancillary areas are protected from transporting vast quantities of construction materials and after completion, the safe movement of converging nuclear waste shipments.
The business opportunities can mitigate impacts of the expanding population and improve schools, medical facilities, recreation opportunities even entertainment venues, the report states.
"Nye County believes that a number of industrial and commercial opportunities will emerge as a result of repository development and that a certain percentage of people working either directly or indirectly on the YMP will choose to live in the surrounding area," Giampaoli states in summarizing the Gateway Area concept.
The Gateway concept plan envisions widening Highway 95 to four lanes from Mercury north to Beatty, a 64 mile segment. The Gate 510 road would be upgraded and rerouted to the east to align with Highway 373, which would be the main entrance from Highway 95 to the Yucca Mountain repository, the plan states.
The Gateway would represent about nine square miles south of the Gate 510 entrance to the Nevada Test Site at Lathrop Wells. It includes a three mile segment of Highway 95 as well as 41 acres privately-owned, which includes two truck stops, a brothel, an RV park, private residence and material lay-down yard leased by the Nye County nuclear waste repository project office.
Giampaoli notes as southern Nye County communities grow in relation to increased activities at Yucca Mountain, the county will work to expand infrastructure at Amargosa Valley and Beatty, providing a framework to develop commerce and industry for community life that will be attractive to new and existing Yucca Mountain employees.
A natural gas line would have to be extended 87 miles from Las Vegas to the site, the report states. She added while Southwest Gas expressed little interest previously in extending a natural gas pipeline to Pahrump, a revised proposal from Nye County could request transmitting natural gas from the Kern River pipeline to the Gateway area via Pahrump.
The Nye County School District has preliminary plans to construct a new three-building campus near Anvil Road and School Lane in Amargosa Valley, with separate buildings for elementary and high school students, a mile east of the existing school, the report states.
A Nye County emergency services group, including law enforcement, fire department and medical services, has been proposed to the U.S. Department of Energy. The fire station, medical facilities, law enforcement facilities and other buildings for this group would be constructed in the Gateway Area.
Giampaoli states Nye County is negotiating with the DOE for a fire department staffed with nine full-time firefighters to be stationed in the Gateway Area to respond to any fire emergencies and hazardous material incidents.
The report adds, "Nye County proposed to DOE to establish a jointly-operated, integrated medical facility in the Gateway Area." It would be located near Gate 510.
A wellness clinic could include fitness and swimming facilities and child day care.
Traffic being routed to the repository would be separated from Highway 95 by a bypass, the project envisions. A shuttle bus could provide transportation for employees from Amargosa Valley, Beatty and Pahrump.
A visitors center would provide tourists with an orientation of the nation's nuclear waste program.
"The Gateway Area offers an efficient, attractive and interactive working environment for YMP employees and related business entities," the report states. It adds, "Because of its proximity to the site, it also offers enhanced adjunct opportunities in waste management research, science and monitoring, visitor learning and commercial business expansion."
DOE can create a more inclusive community of managers, scientists, engineers, technicians and administrators at the site, Giampaoli notes. The relocation of existing DOE contractors and corporate offices from Las Vegas would provide a high quality, near-site working environment for day-to-day management and administration of Yucca Mountain project activities, she said.
A solar research center and renewable energy demonstration park could include wind turbines and solar panels to supplement on-site power requirements, Giampaoli suggested. An area to the north could house interactive science and research facilities over the Yucca Mountain performance and other aspects of the waste management program, she said.
A commercial area, south of Highway 95, could include automobile service facilities, RV parks, hotels, dining and retail shops.
The ideal situation would be for Nye County to become the landowner, but Giampaoli notes the BLM disposal land isn't likely to be conveyed to Nye County via congressional action. The county could adopt a zoning ordinance to review land management under the Amargosa Valley master plan.
Congressional legislation passed in 1999 allowed Nye County the exclusive right to purchase 354 acres at the entrance to Yucca Mountain at fair market value and 470 acres at special government prices that would be used for a museum, research center and renewable energy project.
Nye County purchased the first 61 acres in 2002 to establish the Amargosa Valley Science and Technology Park.
Giampaoli concludes: "It can be reasonably assumed that development of the lands will begin within the next five year period. Further, if DOE receives a license to proceed with repository construction, the rate of land development can reasonably be expected to accelerate."
---------------------------
Pahrump Valley Times
July 07, 2007
PETT peeve
Nye Rejects DOE Offer of $250,000 Annual Increases
By Mark Waite
PVT
TONOPAH -- Nye County commissioners Tuesday turned down a U.S. Department of Energy offer to increase the annual Payments Equal to Taxes by $250,000 during each of the next five years.
Commissioners had hired consultant Steve Bradhurst in February for up to $40,000 to lead negotiations with the DOE for the PETT funds for the years 2009-2013. Nye County received $11.25 million for this year.
Nye County, in its original request, requested much larger PETT payments ranging from $23 million in 2009 up to $29 million in 2013.
DOE countered with an offer to give Nye County $11.5 million in PETT payments in 2009, increasing to $12.5 million in PETT by 2013.
Bradhurst said he called negotiators from DOE last Friday to see if there was any flexibility. DOE emailed back that the offer for $250,000 annual increases would not be changed.
Three approaches are normally used in appraisals: market, cost and income. The cost approach is the way to appraise this property, Bradhurst said. A market approach isn't possible since they're not selling nuclear waste repositories. The income approach isn't usable since the DOE isn't making money on it, he said.
"As you start to develop the cost of the repository, it's unique. Nobody's ever done it before. But it is standard to take a project and look at the cost of the project," Bradhurst said.
"It looks like this is something similar to a utility under construction, like a power plant under construction. If you were to start to build a power plant, all the value of that power plant includes the cost of finding the site and all the studies that go into the site.".
Merlino assessed the property at $31.7 million in 1992, but Bradhurst noted since then the DOE spent close to $6 billion on the site.
"For sure, the appraisal would be higher for FY 2009," he said. "A request for $20 million for FY '09 would seem to be reasonable. It represents a compromise for the time being, it would be a stipulated agreement bridging the gap."
A letter from Nye County Commission Chairman Gary Hollis, initiating the negotiating sessions, stated the county should be paid at least $17.4 million in 2009 due to the rising land values in Amargosa Valley, unadjusted since 2001. Then there are additional improvements like the proposed railroad, construction, underground shafts, ventilation systems and infrastructure.
Hollis estimated 147,000 acres of public land had been withdrawn for the project, including the rail line.
The request for $23 million would be only 5 percent of the $444 million budget approved for the Yucca Mountain Project this year, Bradhurst said.
"We have an impasse at the worker bee level but we need to get to the policy level and talk about it," he said.
Prior PETT agreements provided $30 million for a five-year period from 1999 through 2003, followed by $38 million from 2004 through 2008.
Nye County uses PETT funds for a variety of things. In the coming year the county allocated $750,000 in PETT funds for the traffic light at Homestead Road and Highway 160; $2 million for building construction at the Calvada duck ponds; $1.095 million for the Pahrump chip-seal program; $750,000 for the Great Basin College project and $555,000 for a microwave communications system among a long list of items.
---------------------------
BlueRidgeNow
July 07, 2007
Nuclear power is the answer
Wharton Nelson
Be Our Guest
Don't be misled! No one has a fault-free solution to the complex problem of reducing worldwide climate warming due to carbon dioxide.
Some 80 percent of the world's energy comes from burning carbonaceous fossil fuels like coal, oil and natural gas. The U.S. and China are among the important sources of CO2.
Coal, the dirtiest and cheapest fuel available, produces the lowest cost electricity. Unfortunately, its flue gases contains acidic, smog-forming sulfur and nitrogen-containing gases.
Coal ash has traces of poisonous mercury compounds also not removed efficiently by older power plant equipment. The compounds can contaminate soil and water and fish near the plants. The high proportion of CO2 in flue gases is not removed by any commercial process now available.
The only current proven large-scale method of continuous power generation which creates no CO2 or ash is the use of atomic reactors. They burn no carbon-containing fuels. They have now been used successfully in large-scale power plants for years without personnel injury or atmospheric impairment.
France, in commercial government-run plants, now generates 80 percent of its electricity with nuclear reactors versus 20 percent for the U.S.
The Exelon power company centered in Chicago operates 31 nuclear power reactors, including the rebuilt Three Mile Island one.
The Southeastern U.S. has about 33 commercial reactors. So an important beginning has been made in our part of the U.S.
A persistent criticism about nuclear power is the current lack of a safe disposal method for still-radioactive spent nuclear fuel rods. Now they are stored underwater near each power plant.
This procedure awaits the long-delayed completion of the Yucca Mountain safe storage cave in Nevada. The delay has been extended by the concern of Nevada residents.
Recently, an international partnership has been proposed to obviate the long delay. In it, the U.S. will reprocess spent nuclear fuel rods from all over the world, as described by Clay Sell of the Global Nuclear Partnership. This would replace long storage for nuclear decay in an underground repository like Yucca Mountain.
The substitution of nuclear power for burning fossil fuels to generate electricity is well under way. Sen. Lamar Alexander puts it succinctly, "If you care about global warming and clean air, it is hard not to be for nuclear power."
Wharton Nelson is a semi-retired chemical engineer who has spent 32 years researching and recommending solutions to boiler problems.
---------------------------
Contra Costa Times
July 06, 2007
Nuclear power plants
Contra Costa Times
With a Growing demand for electricity and the threat of global warming, the nation will need new sources of energy that do not increase atmospheric carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases.
There are many new efforts to develop alternative types of energy that are more environmentally friendly than burning fossil fuels. The problem is that many of these technologies are in their infancy and are not likely to provide a significant portion of our energy for many years.
Also, some of the energy alternatives, such as ethanol, have negative effects, including decreasing the acreage that is used for food production.
In most instances, the alternative fuels are considerably more expensive than fossil fuels and are not as reliable. Solar and wind energy are two examples.
That does not mean we should abandon our efforts to improve and develop solar, wind, geothermal, biomass, tidal and other energy sources.
But neither should we ignore a source of energy that does not produce greenhouse gases, has costs similar to fossil fuels, does not require huge fuel imports and has a long safety record: nuclear energy.
Unfortunately, the United States has turned its back on nuclear power plants for the past couple of decades as oil prices dropped in the late 1980s and 1990s. Also, fears of nuclear energy and the lack of a plan to dispose of nuclear waste dealt a blow to the industry.
That has not been the case in some other countries. France produces almost all of its electricity from nuclear power plants. Japan also meets much of its electricity needs with nuclear power. There is no good reason why the United States should not once again construct nuclear power plants.
In fact, with skyrocketing oil prices and increased dependency on sources of oil and natural gas from the most volatile parts of the world, there is renewed interest in nuclear power.
There are 28 applications for new nuclear power plants nationwide, many of which have a good chance of being accepted. Many states in the South and a few elsewhere, including New York, are open to nuclear power plant construction.
It would be a lot easier to get support for nuclear power plants if Congress would approve the nuclear waste storage site at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. But even without it, nuclear power plants should be built.
They are among the safest means of energy production, do not pollute and can compete economically with oil and natural gas. Safeguarding spent nuclear fuel is the only significant downside to nuclear energy, but it is a problem we and other nations can handle.
Nuclear energy proponents believe new U.S. plants can be on line by 2015. For the sake of the environment, energy independence and adequate supplies of electrical power, let's hope the forecasts are accurate.
---------------------------
State of Nevada
Agency for Nuclear Projects
www.state.nv.us/nucwaste/
nwpo@nuc.state.nv.us
775-687-3744
---------------------------