Today, two hearings took place in the US Senate dealing with
the difficult politics of nuclear power generation:
First, in the Energy and Natural Resources Committee,
chaired by Sen. Jeff Bingaman, testimony was given on Bingaman's nuclear waste
management bill (S. 3469*: Nuclear Waste Administration Act of 2012.) The bill
is based on the recommendations of the president’s Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s
Nuclear Future. Brent Scowcroft, co-chairman of that commission, was one of the
experts testifying. According to independent analysis, the probability that
this bill will become law is only ~3%.
(* / "A bill to establish a new organization to manage
nuclear waste, provide a consensual process for siting nuclear waste
facilities, ensure adequate funding for managing nuclear waste, and for other
purposes.")
Second, in the Environment and Public Works Committee,
chaired by Sen. Barbara Boxer, The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Chair
and other Commission members were questioned about the NRC’s progress in
ensuring nuclear power plant safety, while incorporating lessons learned from
the Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear power plant disaster into new safety systems and
procedures.
In both cases, the material discussed in these hearings
seems to have been an outcome of anxieties expressed by members of the general
public about the safety of, in the first case, procedures for the storage of
spent nuclear fuel and, in the second case, the nuclear power generation process
itself; i.e., when faced by the possibility of natural disasters which go
"beyond the design basis."
Members of the general public, who seem to hold the view
that zero risk is an attainable goal for nuclear power generation devices and
procedures, continue to impede the development of a sensible national policy
for nuclear waste disposal. This, in turn, complicates the attempt to continue
to operate existing nuclear reactors, and to construct new reactors.
No comments:
Post a Comment