Clyburn, Graham speak up for nuclear powerBy David Slade (Contact)
The Post and Courier
Saturday, August 23, 2008
South Carolina's U.S. Rep. James Clyburn and Sen. Lindsey Graham delivered a bipartisan message of support for nuclear power Friday at a conference in Charleston. Both are confident federal legislation helpful to the industry will be forthcoming. "We will have a national energy policy," Clyburn, the House Majority whip and a top-ranking Democrat, said. "It will be wind, it will be solar, it will be biofuel, and, by golly, it will be nuclear." Clyburn and Graham, South Carolina's senior Republican senator, said the state doesn't have the potential for wind power and solar energy that other states enjoy but that South Carolina is a leader in both nuclear power and nuclear know-how. "Every nuclear power plant that comes safely online makes us more energy independent," Graham said. Both said they think South Carolina could take a leading role in the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel, if a decades-old ban on the process were lifted. "The French understand the (nuclear) waste problem, and they recycle nuclear fuel," Graham said. "We can do it at the Savannah River plant." Previous storiesPSC rules utility has to wait to start work, published 08/07/08 Graham says plan would boost state, published 08/05/08 Plant to turn plutonium into fuel; Work begins on facility to reduce nuclear stockpiles, published 08/02/08 More drilling not long-term solution (guest column by James Clyburn), published 07/16/08 Graham and Clyburn spoke at the "Securing Our Future: The Nuclear Alternative" conference, sponsored by the Medical University of South Carolina, S.C. State University, the U.S. Department of Energy, the National Nuclear Security Administration and the Washington Division of URS Corp., which manages federal programs involving nuclear waste. Speaking separately and in interviews that followed, Clyburn and Graham both said: --Proposed "green" power mandates that would require states to get a percentage of their power from sources like solar and wind power also should include nuclear power. --The reprocessing of nuclear fuel should be allowed, which would be a boon to the Savannah River plant, where nuclear weapons were once produced. The practice is banned in the United States because it produces plutonium, an ingredient of nuclear weapons. --More tax credits and streamlined regulators for nuclear plants should be approved at the federal level. Graham said utility companies in South Carolina are betting that will happen; a bet he's been encouraging them to take. In May, the South Carolina Public Service Commission allowed Duke Energy Corp. to spend up to $230 million through 2009 on pre-construction work for a nuclear power plant in Cherokee County. In June, S.C. Electric & Gas Co. said it will need to raise electric rates 37 percent over 11 years to pay for two new nuclear units it is proposing to build in the Midlands with Santee Cooper. SCE&G also wants to build two new reactors, for about $10 billion, at its Fairfield County plant. Several environmental groups have objected to the new Duke and SCE&G reactors. Meanwhile, the Southern Energy Network announced that nuclear power opponents will meet today at the same hotel where the conference is being held, the Marriott on Lockwood Boulevard, to "speak out against the dangers and false hopes of nuclear power." Reach David Slade at 937-5552 or dslade@postandcourier.com. |
Article tools |
|
Notice about comments: Charleston.net is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Charleston.net does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not charleston.net. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Full terms and conditions can be read here. |
Comments
This article has 14 comment(s)
Posted by Sandy37 on August 23, 2008 at 2:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Before they start building Nuclear Reactors everyone should make arrangements to store all the waste in the state that the reactor is in.. I lived in Los Alamos and there was waste everywhere, no telling how many have been effected by this. They have built waste storage places in NM and Navada and the people have refused to have the waste deposited there. It is crazy to think you can build a reactor for YOUR cheap power and expect another state to take your waste...SOLAR AND WIND ARE MUCH GREENER.
Posted by iceman1978 on August 23, 2008 at 9:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Sandy, Solar and wind are good but they won't generate enough to handle the needs of the country. I wish that every household in the sun belt could have solar panels on the roofs, not to mention the roof space on shopping malls. If they were more affordable I'd have them on my house. It would probably eliminate the need to use coal or oil to make power, but we would still need the existing nuclear infrastructure.
It's true that France relies heavily on the use of nuclear power with relatively few problems, as does Japan, but they are much smaller than the US and have few other options. Neither country has substantial oil or gas deposits so that's pretty much out. The advantage that the US has when it comes to solar and wind is the vast amount of space we have. Think of the potential in the deserts of Arizona or Nevada alone for solar power.
Posted by zoomru on August 23, 2008 at 10:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
ICEWAN1978 and everyone else............
OUR COASTAL WIND....! OFF SHORE WINDFARMS TOO !!
THAT's the truth NO ONE talks about !
WE should lead the nation in this effort!
THE TECHNOLOGY IS NOW !!!!!!
Posted by Sandy37 on August 23, 2008 at 6:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I am not saying SC can not have Nuclear Reactors I just want them to keep the waste generated in SC. I am sure if you have to worry about the result of it getting in your ground water and infecting your population it will be done right. Right now in my mothers county they want to put in a coal burning generator. She lives in a valley with mountains on all sides. The family moved to that area because they had asthma many generations ago and the power goes to California. Why could it not have been built in the desert of CA, where no one lives. Everyone should live with their own messes.
Posted by rollo on August 23, 2008 at 6:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Sandy: Reprocessing; it works in France, it will work here.
Iceman: Solar panels on the roof will have to be removed to repair or replace the roof . If you have trees near your house, there will be issues with leaf build-up on and around your panels, not to mention limb damage in severe weather. There is unused land in deserts for sure, because they are uninhabitable. There is no transmission infrastructure there. It is certainly doable, but so far, no power company finds it to be worth the preliminary costs.
Zoomru: Until the next real good tropical storm or hurricane,
You weren't here for the 3 to 8 weeks after Hugo were you?
John Doe and RW: Now is not the time to sack the fuels that helped us build our nation, including nuclear. You are correct! We can putz around with alternatives, but we can't afford to stop developing what we already know.
Posted by rollo on August 23, 2008 at 6:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Sandy: We paid for the storage facility in Nevada, now Nevada has the money and the jobs, but is reneging on the storage. SC has been the general repository for the rest of the nation and many parts of the world for decades. Force the rest of the US to do their part.
The rich states take the money and dump on the poor states.
Posted by rollo on August 23, 2008 at 6:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yucca Mountain Nuclear Repository, Is taking the money then refusing to do the job what you're advocating, Sandy?
Posted by mkris on August 23, 2008 at 7:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
OH yes, I want to see a reactor 8 weeks after a hurricane like Hugo. But most importantly it shoujd be placed on the peninsula. That way we can all tell who the important people are. They'll glow.
Posted by Sandy37 on August 24, 2008 at 1:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I understand that there are flaws in the site at Yucca Mountain and the people that will be effected won't have it. Much to say about government work. I am a Downwinder, so to save you all, my family in large numbers have died or suffered greatly. You ask a nuclear scientist to give his opinion and he is going to give you his pocketbook answer. If you can reprocess until the product is harmless. You do not need Yucca Mountain nor the one in Carlsbad NM. If you trace back to these sites you will find big R. Senators involved. Nuclear Reactors are dangerous, so live dangerously.
Posted by rollo on August 24, 2008 at 8:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Posted by mkris on August 23, 2008 at 7:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
OH yes, I want to see a reactor 8 weeks after a hurricane like Hugo. But most importantly it shoujd be placed on the peninsula. That way we can all tell who the important people are. They'll glow."
Now and Here folks, we have an excellent example of a nitwit.
Storms and hurricanes have passed near nuclear power plants with 0 negative effects on the reactor. Power lines and substations have been put out of commission temporarily, but the reactor has never been damaged or caused to leak.
There has never been a death caused in this country by a nuclear power incident.
Statements such as that made by mkris are demonstrations of ignorance, mkris is likely to vote for Obama/Biden, because tey promise 0 growth.
Posted by rollo on August 24, 2008 at 8:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"
Posted by Sandy37 on August 24, 2008 at 1:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I understand that there are and the people that will be effected won't have it."
But, they took the money for the job! If they don't want the job, that's fine! Give us back ALL the money, and we'll do a different plan! That's fine with me.
"flaws in the site at Yucca Mountain"
What flaws are you talking about? The normal geological faults that are present in all rock? The faults that everyone knew were there before Nevada agreed to take the money? Before Nevada reneged on the job???
If you don't want the job, give back the money. All of the money.
Posted by rollo on August 24, 2008 at 8:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Sandy, You and those who agree with you have screwed the rest of the nation(the taxpayers) out of BILLIONS of dollars to produce 0 of any value. You're on welfare, aren't you?
You are the ultimate outhouse of society. You cry about being a victim without ever doing any research beyond "ABC NEWS" . Your type take all you can get and refuse to pay anything back.
Loser is your name. Liar is your middle name.
Posted by Carolina_Politics on August 24, 2008 at 10:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It’s about damn time the Feds are getting sensible. Nuclear energy is the cleanest there is and as far as the storage of nuclear waste goes, surely we can take some tips from the French. They’ve been on it for decades and have obviously dealt with the issue successfully.
http://www.carolinapoliticsonline.com/20...
Posted by Sandy37 on August 25, 2008 at 4 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Posted by rollo on August 24, 2008 at 8:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Sandy, You and those who agree with you have screwed the rest of the nation(the taxpayers) out of BILLIONS of dollars to produce 0 of any value. You're on welfare, aren't you?
You are the ultimate outhouse of society. You cry about being a victim without ever doing any research beyond "ABC NEWS" . Your type take all you can get and refuse to pay anything back.
Loser is your name. Liar is your middle name.
I really guess if you call SS, Military Retirement, UC retirement Welfare, so be it, at least I do not expect other states to take care of my trash while you get cheap power.. Yes I am a Democrat as someone pointed out this morning with a blue garbage can on my driveway LOL. Know anyone with that kind of trash mouth? I met a few in Charleston and they seem obsessed by it.