Enabling a nuclear renaissance in the U.S. is a real passion of mine and has been for quite some time. And our country does need nuclear power. I like to tell people nuclear is a three-fer: it provides the reliable, base-load electricity our country demands; it will help us reach our goal of reducing carbon emissions, and it will strengthen our manufacturing bases and create good paying jobs. The current debate on climate change has only made the case for nuclear power stronger and more bipartisan.
– Edited by April Murelio –
Thank you for that introduction, Pete. I am very pleased to be able to address this conference on small modular reactors, which I think is timely and very important to moving forward with this technology. I am very pleased with the team that Secretary Chu has put together. He understands the importance of nuclear and it is reflected in Dr. Miller and his team. I would also like to acknowledge Senator Udall for his contributions to nuclear power, as well as the other members of the nuclear community who are working so hard to make these new designs a reality.
Enabling a nuclear renaissance in the U.S. is a real passion of mine and has been for quite some time. And our country does need nuclear power. I like to tell people nuclear is a three-fer: it provides the reliable, base-load electricity our country demands; it will help us reach our goal of reducing carbon emissions, and it will strengthen our manufacturing bases and create good paying jobs. The current debate on climate change has only made the case for nuclear power stronger and more bipartisan.
I have spent the better part of the last 10 years in the Senate involved in shaping nuclear energy policy for this country, mainly as Chairman or Ranking Member on the Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety of the Senate Committee for Environment and Public Works.
The Subcommittee has oversight of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). I would like to acknowledge the head of that Subcommittee, Senator Tom Carper, who I work very closely with. He gets it when it comes to nuclear, and I know he will carry on with the oversight that we have put into place. We worked very hard together on the Committee to place the right people on the Commission, provide the NRC with the right resources and tools necessary to do its job, and hold them accountable for results. Not everyone understands this, but the nuclear industry needs the NRC to be an effective and credible regulator. If I look at what happened with this oil disaster in the Gulf, it is clear that an entire industry suffers greatly when there is not a strong safety culture, which is something engendered by the NRC every day.
On a personal note, I was at the Santa Fe Seminar on Nuclear Energy in November of last year, and the Japanese representatives sought me out to tell me that NRC approval of procedures and designs was the “Gold Standard” in the nuclear industry. I take great pride in the fact that the Senate Subcommittee has helped the NRC become one of the best and most respected regulatory agencies in the world.
The NRC is front and center in enabling this renaissance. NRC is actively reviewing about 13 combined license applications for some 23 large nuclear power plants. In addition, NRC is preparing itself for the next round of reactor plants, which will likely include the small modular reactors that are the subject of this conference.
The independent Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC) issued its assessment report of the new reactor licensing process in April 2010. The Center’s assessment was that the NRC and industry have done a remarkable job under trying circumstances during this initial licensing of new nuclear power plants. It speaks very well for making new nuclear power plants in the United States a reality.
The nuclear industry is extremely important to the future of our country. Again I want to reiterate that nuclear power enhances our energy security with baseload capacity, reduced emissions, quality jobs, and the development of small modular reactors can re-establish us as a leader in the global nuclear marketplace. I am introducing a bill within days called the “Enabling the Nuclear Renaissance Act.” It is a comprehensive bill containing several titles that outline what I think remains to be done to continue the revival of nuclear power in our country.
First, the bill declares that nuclear energy is a clean energy, which allows the United States to consider all sources of energy in legislation developing a national clean energy portfolio.
The bill provides strong financial incentives to build the first several plants, including a total of $54 billion in loan guarantees; as well as tax incentives and grants for manufacturing, construction, and production of nuclear facilities. These financial incentives would be available for utilities, manufacturers, and suppliers. The bill also contains titles on improving the licensing process, developing infrastructure, and training the nuclear workforce. In addition, the bill contains a title to establish a new independent federal corporation to help address the issue of nuclear used fuel and high-level waste.
Of significant interest in the bill is the title for accelerating the development of small modular reactors (known as SMRs). Since you are here at this conference, you probably know that the SMRs represent an emerging market in nuclear. They are much more affordable for U.S. utilities, and they are scalable to the needs of the end user. The target markets for these SMRs include rural areas where the transmission infrastructure is weak and specialized applications, such as military applications, replacing aging fossil plants, or industrial process heat applications.
As you probably know, there are utility consortiums that are already lining up behind these SMRs to build them once they are licensed by NRC. DOE has proposed $39 million in its FY11 budget for these SMRs, and I am working in the Appropriations committee to add an additional $16 million to get the development accelerated. I am encouraging you all at this conference to contact your Senators on the Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water, as well as your Representatives on the House Appropriations Committee, to add this appropriation funding for SMRs.
How is this bill different? Let me talk about some of the bills that are out there today. First, my energy team worked with Senator Lieberman’s team and put together a nuclear title for the current Kerry-Lieberman bill designed to address climate change. I want you to know that I do not support an economy-wide cap and trade bill which parallels Waxman-Markey in increasing costs to rate payers and business in the country when our economy is fragile. Nonetheless, I think that the nuclear title in the Kerry-Lieberman bill is really good on financial incentives for the nuclear industry to build the first handful of large new nuclear plants. As a result, much of the financial title in my bill is based on that bill. However, the Kerry-Lieberman bill stopped short of addressing the emerging area of SMRs.
Separately, Senator Bingaman introduced a bill last fall titled Nuclear Power 2021, and there is a companion bill on the House side introduced by Representative Altmire which really does well to develop two SMRs. These bills will likely fund SMRs of light water reactor technology, but may close the door on other reactor designs that are better for other applications. The American Nuclear Society has done some really good work on the emerging field of SMRs, and there are a lot of designs out there. I have met with Tom Sanders, President of the American Nuclear Society, and I believe that we need to expand our thinking beyond light water reactors to other types of reactor designs for applications such as high-temperature industrial process heat (example: an aluminum factory needs lots of energy to melt metal), smaller reactors for isolated power needs, or reactors that produce waste with much shorter radioactive decay times than light water reactors.
Well friends, I think we need to have a more aggressive approach to these SMRs than we’ve got today. As I said, the DOE budget calls for about $40 million/year for SMRs. My bill funds an SMR program at $100 million/year for 10 years so that we can accelerate the development of several types of SMR designs. I am very much a fiscal hawk, but in this case I think that what is at stake merits funding this program at a higher level.
Honestly, I’m hell-bent to accelerate this SMR development effort. As I’ve said, nuclear is vital to the interests of the United States! If you look around the world, in the countries that are actively moving forward with new nuclear power plants, the projects are backed and funded by their governments. Strategically, these new reactors represent a real opportunity for us to re-establish U.S. global leadership in nuclear power. We can’t let these other countries take over the world market. We need to seize the day, and we need the funding in this title to help us do that!
Going forward, there is a chance that an energy bill will be considered during this session of Congress, although I’m less optimistic each day that we will be able to get this done because of the length of time it will take to pass it. In 2003 we tried to get a bill done – we took six weeks and it didn’t pass, and it wasn’t until 2005 that we got the Energy Policy Act enacted. It took another six weeks to get the Energy Independence and Security Act done in 2007. If we do an energy bill, I would expect that nuclear would be a part of any discussions, and of course my bill should be a prime candidate to be included. I personally believe that the SMR title is among the most important parts of what I’m introducing, and I will work hard to make it a reality.
I am also working on a couple of other things to continue our momentum on nuclear. First, I’m really excited by an initiative started at The Ohio State University. The Ohio State has organized a Nuclear Task Force to help devise a strategy and plan for addressing some critical challenges for the future nuclear energy needs in Ohio and the United States.
The Task Force consists of national leaders from industry and academia, and has identified four major challenges:
1) Supply and Infrastructure;
2) Fiscal Constraints;
3) Regulatory Issues; and
4) The Nuclear Workforce.
I am working with DOE on this task force, and think that the results could serve as a role model for the United States. As such, the Task Force will be forwarding its results and recommendations to DOE later this year.
In addition, Senator Tom Carper and I are putting together a summit this fall to help set the strategic direction for further developments in nuclear power. The summit will provide a forum for industry, Congress, the White House, government agencies, national labs and the financial community to develop a common understanding and vision in continuing to revitalize the nuclear power industry in the United States. We are moving on a variety of fronts in nuclear, but there needs to be a forum to ensure our efforts are coordinated. Tom and I, along with nine other Senators from both the Democratic and Republican parties, requested the White House to participate in this summit, and we hope to hear back from the administration in the near future.
In closing, I would like everyone in this room to know that you have a part to play in developing this area of nuclear power. Your work can make a significant difference for the energy security of the United States, and really, its future. Your country needs and appreciates your efforts, and “Keep up the Good Work.”
Thank you.