Obama Supports Nuclear

pgabriel · Feb 16, 2010

I agree, I think its about time we got over our fears, especially if we want to wean ourselves off fossil fuels.

link

By Anna Fifield and Kevin Sieff in Washington

Published: February 16 2010 18:18 | Last updated: February 16 2010 18:41

President Barack Obama redoubled his efforts to promote nuclear power as a clean energy source on Tuesday, saying that $8bn in loan guarantees for the first nuclear power plant to be built in three decades was “only the beginning”.

Portraying nuclear energy as a key part of cutting carbon emissions at the same time as creating new, high-tech jobs, the president appealed for bi-partisan support to build more reactors. The push for nuclear power is part of the Obama administration’s efforts to pass climate change legislation.

On an issue that affects our economy, our security, and the future of our planet, we can’t continue to be mired in the same old stale debates between left and right, between environmentalists and entrepreneurs,” Mr Obama said at job training centre in Maryland.

“See, our competitors are racing to create jobs and command growing energy industries. And nuclear energy is no exception,” he said, pointing to investments in Japan, France, China and South Korea.

Mr Obama’s administration on Tuesday announced it would give $8.3bn in loan guarantees to help Southern Co build two reactors at a plant in Burke, Georgia.

Southern was among four companies named last year as being considered to share $18.5bn in federal loan guarantees to build new nuclear power facilities.

The White House said the Burke project would entail about 3,500 onsite construction jobs and 800 permanent operations jobs. Power generated at the facility would serve about 1.4m people in 550,000 homes, it said.

As his administration struggles with a stubbornly high unemployment rate and endeavours to keep climate change on the political front-burner, Mr Obama has suggested he can kill two birds with one stone by investing in clean energy sources.

After championing nuclear energy in his State of the Union address last month, Mr Obama included in his 2011 budget request a total of $54bn in loan guarantees — tripling the size of the existing guarantee programme — to encourage the construction of as many as 10 nuclear power plants.

There are now 104 nuclear power plants supplying 20 per cent of the US’s energy, but no nuclear projects have been started since 1977.

Mr Obama said that nuclear energy was nevertheless the US’s largest source of fuel that produced no carbon emissions.

“To meet our growing energy needs and prevent the worst consequences of climate change, we’ll need to increase our supply of nuclear power. It’s that simple,” he said. “This one plant, for example, will cut carbon pollution by 16m tonnes each year when compared to a similar coal plant. That’s like taking 3.5m cars off the road.”

Some Republicans, such as senators John McCain of Arizona and Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, have previously expressed support for more nuclear power plants. But the increasing partisan divide in Washington and pressure from right-wing groups has made it more politically difficult for Republicans to support any Obama administration initiatives.

Building more nuclear power plants is a key part of the climate change legislation that has stalled in the Senate, where Democrats do not have the votes to pass a bill without some Republican support.

Mr Obama called on Republicans to support comprehensive energy and climate legislation.

“I believe there’s real common ground here. And my administration will be working to build on areas of agreement so that we can pass a bipartisan energy and climate bill through the Senate,” he said.

But since Mr Obama made his budget request, there have been objections from across the political spectrum.

Many critics claim that high risk ratings of nuclear reactor construction have long deterred Wall Street investment. In 2003, the Congressional Budget Office rated the risk of default on a nuclear loan guarantee to be above 50 percent.

Nuclear advocates claim that mistakes made in the 1970s that led to billions of dollars of losses and hampered the construction of new reactors have been fixed. They claim that a streamlined permitting process and standardised plant designs will lower construction costs and prevent delays.

“Our plants are currently the cheapest source of energy in the country,” said Leslie Kass, senior director for business policy and programs at the Nuclear Energy Institute. “Yes, they are capital intensive and there are large upfront costs . . . but we have companies putting up considerable investment here, and they’re doing their due diligence.”

The mounting logistical challenges facing Mr Obama’s nuclear power ambitions are further complicated by the administration’s plans, announced last week, to close Yucca Mountain, the country’s controversial proposed nuclear waste repository.

With Yucca no longer an option, the administration has announced a 15-member commission to consider the future of nuclear waste storage, headed by former congressman Lee Hamilton and former National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2010. You may share using our article tools. Please don't cut articles from FT.com and redistribute by email or post to the web.
Click to expand...

Dream Sequence · Feb 16, 2010

I saw this and was even more happy to see that he is calling for more $ in guarantees next year. Think its high time we start developing nuclear power again...

Depressio · Feb 16, 2010

Cue all the pro-nuclear conservatives suddenly being against it!

DonnyMost · Feb 16, 2010

Very happy to hear this.

BetterThanEver · Feb 16, 2010

Obama has been campaigning for more clean energy and set the stage with the hiring of Steven Chu as energy chief., pro-nuclear scientist.

Obama is a stud.

ROXRAN · Feb 16, 2010

I'm ready...

madmonkey37 · Feb 16, 2010

Should probably take care of the repository issue first. I know California has a law that bans new construction on nuke plants until there is a designated nuclear waste repository. I think the US should find some poor desert county and stash all our waste there for a a couple hundred million a year or so. Ok maybe not, but whats probably going to happen is that they won't find another location for the nuclear waste and it ends up being stored where its used.

Cokebabies · Feb 16, 2010

Everyone supports the environment and financial effectiveness of nuclear power.

The problem is no one wants to build them in their backyard.

Samurai Jack · Feb 16, 2010

Good news, we need to be a world leader in this tech.

Landlord Landry · Feb 16, 2010

Cokebabies said:

Everyone supports the environment and financial effectiveness of nuclear power.

The problem is no one wants to build them in their backyard.
Click to expand...

Ever been to Ohio?

Oak Harbor doesn't care.

basso · Feb 16, 2010

just give me the warm power of the sun
give me the steady flow of a waterfall
give me the spirit of living things as they return to clay
give me the restless power of the wind
give the comforting glow of a wood fire
but please, take all your atomic poison power away!

not.

Invisible Fan · Feb 16, 2010

The nuclear lobby has supported him since he was a Jr. Senator.

DFWRocket · Feb 16, 2010

TSchmal said:

Cue all the pro-nuclear conservatives suddenly being against it!
Click to expand...

I'm all FOR it.

mc mark · Feb 16, 2010

Invisible Fan said:

The nuclear lobby has supported him since he was a Jr. Senator.
Click to expand...

People that pay attention know this. Others just want to

SCOREBOARD

LScolaDominates · Feb 16, 2010

Cokebabies said:

Everyone supports the environment and financial effectiveness of nuclear power.
Click to expand...

Could not be further from the truth.

RocketManJosh · Feb 16, 2010

I've supported very little with Obama in office, but this is a great step forward IMO

Dave_78 · Feb 16, 2010

It's "nucular"

rhadamanthus · Feb 17, 2010

Don't like without well-planned and ready-to-go waste repository.

Samurai Jack · Feb 17, 2010

rhadamanthus said:

Don't like without well-planned and ready-to-go waste repository.
Click to expand...

I thought they were already building one of the things years ago?

Somewhere in the southwest, New Mexico maybe

rhadamanthus · Feb 17, 2010

Samurai Jack said:

I thought they were already building one of the things years ago?

Somewhere in the southwest, New Mexico maybe
Click to expand...

You're thinking of Yucca Mountain in Nevada.

1) It's not approved for use. (Reid has pretty much guarunteed it's demise)
2) Obama already proposed defunding it.
3) Even if they did finally use the damn thing it can't hold all the waste anymore.

Forums

Obama Supports Nuclear

pgabriel Educated Negro

Dream Sequence Member

Depressio Member

DonnyMost Member
Supporting Member

BetterThanEver Member

ROXRAN Member

madmonkey37 Member

Cokebabies Member

Samurai Jack Member

Landlord Landry Member

basso Member
Supporting Member

Invisible Fan Member

DFWRocket Member

mc mark Member

LScolaDominates Member

RocketManJosh Member

Dave_78 Member

rhadamanthus Member

Samurai Jack Member

rhadamanthus Member

Share This Page

About ClutchFans

Rockets Content

Support ClutchFans!

Obama Supports Nuclear

pgabriel Educated Negro

Dream Sequence Member

Depressio Member

DonnyMost Member Supporting Member

BetterThanEver Member

ROXRAN Member

madmonkey37 Member

Cokebabies Member

Samurai Jack Member

Landlord Landry Member

basso Member Supporting Member

Invisible Fan Member

DFWRocket Member

mc mark Member

LScolaDominates Member

RocketManJosh Member

Dave_78 Member

rhadamanthus Member

Samurai Jack Member

rhadamanthus Member

Share This Page

DonnyMost Member
Supporting Member

basso Member
Supporting Member