News
Among the speakers Monday was Dale Klein, chairman of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Klein spoke about the challenges the United States will face in rebuilding its nuclear industry. Afterward, he talked to the Idaho Statesman.
Q: What is driving the new interest in nuclear power?
A: What I see from the United States perspective is that there is a major resurgence in nuclear for a variety of reasons. One is the high cost of fossil fuels. The other is global warming. And I think another one is, I believe, the changed regulatory structure. More people now have confidence that the NRC can make timely decisions.
Q: How far away are we from the next new reactor?
A: We will get, probably within the next month, the first new combined operating license (application). We expect this year to get three to five, and more than 10 in the 2008 calendar year. One of issues I try to tell people is that electrons are not going to be flowing next year. It will take the NRC about 30 months to do a tech review of a license application. We do not expect electricity flowing from a new nuclear unit until the 2014 time frame.
Q: We have one nuclear plant proposed by Alternate Energy Holdings (a Virginia company that has never built a nuclear power plant but says it wants to build a 1,600-megawatt one in Owyhee County). Do you have any thoughts on that plant, which would be new and not built on an existing site?
A: There are very few green-field (new) sites that have been discussed. We have had very little conversation with this particular activity. There's only been, I think, two letters sent. Our staff is not engaged. It's not on our radar screens very brightly lit. We're aware of it, but there's not much really happening.
Q: Do you think the public still views nuclear power as dangerous?
A: I think the biggest difference we're going to have with this renaissance is that most of the plants will be built at existing sites. The communities where we've had reactors have now been running 20-30 years, so they're comfortable with them and the scare tactics that came out early on didn't materialize. What's fascinating is that when you ask general audiences, ‘What are the two nuclear accidents that occurred in the world?' they'll name them - Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. But if you ask how many people we kill in coal mines a year, they have no clue. For the United States, Three Mile Island injured no one and it was contained. It was an expensive accident for the utility, and we're better off today because of that, but Three Mile Island clearly caused a lack of confidence in industry.
Q: You mentioned in your presentation that if the proposed Yucca Mountain disposal site is approved it would be full almost as soon as it's open. What is the solution to nuclear waste?
A: If you look at most countries with large nuclear programs, they recycle the spent fuel. That significantly reduces the volume of materials to be disposed of. But all countries that have a nuclear program that are looking at disposal are looking at geological disposal. The whole world agrees that ultimately you'll need to find a very stable formation that has been stable for millions of years and therefore will likely be stable in the future and then put the (waste) emplacement in. The NRC is the licensee of Yucca. We're not for or against it, but will make a technical decision once Department of Energy submits the application. They are indicating they intend to submit in June '08.
Q: Can the United States get back on track to again take the leadership role in nuclear power?
A: We were the world leader initially. Most of the world's technology was developed in the United States and a lot of it developed here in Idaho. But other countries have surpassed us. We still have the most reactors per country, 104 running today. But if you look at a country like France, which got the technology from Westinghouse originally, they get about 80 percent of their electricity from nuclear. I'm hoping from the technical perspective that we will become the world's leader. There's no reason we can't, but the heavy manufacturing I think will not be done in the U.S., but done in countries like Korea, China and Japan. One issue we're concerned about as a regulator is that we don't get counterfeit components in the nuclear system. We have a fairly robust inspection program.
Q: What impact does the political climate and the effect of a change of power (from Republican to Democrat) have on the nuclear industry?
A: Whether global warming is technically real is personally not my area, but I can tell you it's politically real. There is a big concern about global warming and a lot of the Democratic leadership has expressed significant concerns about global warming. But at the end of the day, if you're concerned about global warming, one has to look at nuclear. If you look at a 1000-megawatt nuclear plant, it takes about 500 acres. If you look at a 1,000 megawatt solar plant, it takes about 40,000 acres. If you have a 1,000 megawatt wind farm, it's about 150,000 acres. For baseline generation, it's going to come down to coal and nuclear, and we need them both. It's not one or the other. No matter who is in the presidency or in Congress, we need a sound energy program, and it will likely involve nuclear.
Ken Dey: 672-6757
| < prev | next > |