Nuclear confusion ; Washington must forge clear policies

396 words14 February 2010Worcester Telegram & Gazettenglish
© 2010 Worcester Telegram & Gazette. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All Rights Reserved.

One year into his presidency, Barack Obama's stance on nuclear energy is fast becoming a study in contradictions. The fiscal 2011 budget he recently unveiled calls for an additional $36 billion in loan guarantees designed to support what he referred to in his State of the Union address as "a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants." But that same budget would eliminate funding for the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository, a project that the nation has already spent some $38 billion to develop, and which remains the only viable, long-term storage option in sight.
Whatever one thinks of global warming, it is clear that nuclear energy offers Americans an emissions-free means of easing our dependence on foreign oil. With 104 operational nuclear plants, the U.S. obtains nearly 20 percent of its electricity from nuclear power. That number could be much higher, but only if government commits itself to a clear and consistent political and regulatory framework that includes sensible options for waste storage.While seeking to end the Yucca Mountain project, the administration promises to convene a blue-ribbon panel to find a long-term waste storage solution. But the Yucca Mountain project was that solution, and would have begun accepting waste more than a decade ago had Washington been willing to place science ahead of politics. Launching another study group is no solution, but simply continues a cycle of governmental inaction and delay that could eventually prove fatal to the nation's nuclear program.
Already, Americans are grappling with the effects of aging nuclear plants, such as the Vermont Yankee plant, which was recently found to be leaking tritium. While experts disagree over the severity and environmental impact of such leaks, there is no question that aging facilities have problems that require prompt attention, and decommissioning of reactors, when necessary, can be done most effectively with a long-term waste solution in view. At the same time, new reactor designs and projects must be encouraged.
Meeting those twin goals can only happen when Washington puts together a comprehensive nuclear policy free of internal contradictions.
Investors must be able to proceed with confidence if the nation is to reap the full benefits of nuclear energy. Mere talk and the promise of more loans won't get the job done.