Nuclear industry reaches out to college students with message of national importance

By Rick Morris, President, Smith & Harroff, Inc.

rmorris@smithharroff.com

Electricity in this country is a national issue. The decisions made in Washington will impact the entire country, yet no energy issue is more important to individual consumers than their monthly electric bill. Congress will shape the future of nuclear, coal, wind, solar and other sources of electricity, but these facilities will be built in local communities.
 
Clean Energy America (CEA), a national grassroots speakers’ bureau sponsored by the Nuclear Energy Institute and managed by Smith & Harroff, Inc., operates at both the national and local level.  Comprised of 24 young professionals in the nuclear energy industry, participants volunteer their time to travel the country to speak on various college campuses and conduct media interviews about the benefits of nuclear energy.  In 18 months, CEA has visited 18 states and conducted 35 campus presentations.  The speakers have been interviewed on nationally syndicated programming, and they stay in touch, with each other and the public, via blogging on the CEA site.If you ask any of the speakers about this grassroots effort, the most compelling part of the program is engaging with an undergraduate college audience or an interview with a local radio personality.  It’s here that the speakers enjoy the opportunity to answer questions from students or listeners and fully explain the energy and environmental benefits of nuclear energy.  Each CEA speaker is able to discuss their credible backgrounds, give in-depth responses and, in turn, they are perceived as a credible source of information on nuclear energy.  A nuclear power plant operator, one trained in the safety culture of the industry with a background in engineering, can give a powerful and substantive answer to some of the concerns of the public.

Each speaker has a unique role within the industry and gains a wealth of experience from the trips as well as training in public speaking and media interviews.  The program has the added bonus of grooming the next generation of nuclear industry professionals, who gain industry knowledge and public relations know-how throughout their time with Clean Energy America. 

As a public education campaign, Clean Energy America merges national messaging, via the media and social networking, with a more personalized approach to students.  The program seeks to establish a dialogue on a national and a local level.  As our country debates the most beneficial and cost-effective energy strategies, solutions must be found that meet our energy security and environmental objectives, while being acceptable to the individual consumer.

Trident Communications | 31 Timber Lane | Hilton Head Island | SC | 29926

On July 1, 2010 the U.S. House of Representatives passed FY2010 supplemental appropriations legislation by a 239-182 vote.  The Senate will consider this appropriations legislation after the July 4th recess. 

From WhiteHouse.gov:

“Develop the Market for Clean Energy Technologies. The Budget substantially expands support for construction of new nuclear power plants by increasing the Department of Energy loan guarantees authority for such projects by $36 billion, to a total of $54.5 billion, and provides credit subsidy funding of $500 million to support $3 to $5 billion of loan guarantees for energy efficiency and renewable energy projects.  The loan guarantee program will encourage new nuclear facilities and a range of renewable energy projects that reduce greenhouse gases and pollutants, while simultaneously creating jobs and contributing to long-term economic growth.  The Budget also supports research, development, and demonstration activities to accelerate deployment and commercialization of nuclear power, carbon capture and storage, renewable energy, and energy efficiency technologies.  These steps contribute to the development of a more diverse energy portfolio that enhances American energy independence and, ultimately, national security.  To reduce greenhouse gas emissions in developing countries, the United States will help them adopt clean energy technologies and low-carbon development strategies and open up new markets for exports of American clean energy technology.”

Way in with your thoughts regarding (what I consider to be) a great plug for the nuclear industry…

But also, how do you feel about loan guarantees?
What are your suggestions about paying for new nuclear plants?
Is government subsidy the way to go?  Or should we be more creative in our thinking?

In the last week of February Timpla Stewart-Casey and myself were able to be in the DC area to talk about nuclear power.  We were involved in a panel discussion at Georgetown University.  It was a very interesting discussion and a learning experience for me and Timpla. 

My ‘takeaway’ from that experience, which I hope is the point we got across that evening, is that we really need to explore ALL options going into the future.  There is no one right answer for the energy needs of this country.  Anti-nuclear looks at nuclear power under a microscope and then makes hasty generalizations about the potential of wind and solar power. 

The fact is that we have been very successful with nuclear for the past 50 years.  We provide large amounts of energy with a very small number of plants.  The cost to build a new power plant is large; however we supply large amounts of energy to large amounts of people.  The other ‘hot’ topic is waste.  We’ve been storing our waste on-site safely for the past 50 years and will continue to do so until either a national repository is created or we recycle the fuel. 

The other options, although they sound like a quick fix have their struggles too.  Take solar for example.  A solar panel is a wonderful thing, free energy from the sun.  It is similar to an enlarged computer chip which converts radiation energy into heat or electric energy.  The process to manufacture one of these panels is intensive requiring many harmful chemicals in the process.  Once these are installed on your roof top the problem of keeping these clean is a huge issue.  Imagine needing to clean off your solar panels of bird droppings and dust and leaves on a weekly basis.  Disposal is another huge issue which is rarely mentioned.  Panels have a lifetime of 20-25 years.  At this time the issue is very similar to nuclear, we either store or reuse. 

Wind is a great option when the wind is blowing.  Talk of storing the compressed air for when the wind isn’t blowing is a wonderful idea.  However this will only work in certain areas and when you actually want to use that wonderfully clean compressed air to produce electricity you have to add natural gas, *gasp*, to convert it into usable electricity.  Yes, it is smaller amounts of natural gas than at a natural gas plant; however the clean title has just been taken away.  Wind turbines also have a life expectancy of 20-25 years, and the pay off period is 20-25 years.  A company won’t make money on this unless the cost of energy goes up or cap and trade is enacted. 

I really do think that we need ALL types of energy to supply the energy needs of the future.  Just be fair.  Every type of energy has its pros and cons but we need all to keep up with our ever increasing energy demand in the future, 23% more by 2030.  Let’s use the same magnifying glass for all types of energy. 

This blog is written to respond to a middle school student in California who had some questions about nuclear power.  I am happy that he is interested in nuclear power and the benefits it can provide.   

      1.      Do you think nuclear energy is a controversial topic and why? 

Nuclear is a controversial topic, there is no question about that.  I’m glad you asked why.  From my point of view, it is so controversial because people do not know how nuclear power works.  And you’ll come to find out that people don’t like what they don’t know.  Once people understand how clean, reliable and affordable nuclear energy is, the controversy will end.

  Here’s a link to information on nuclear power and how it works:

http://resources.nei.org/justthefacts/default.html

            2.      Are you for or against nuclear energy and why?

I am absolutely for nuclear energy because it can provide a clean, reliable source of energy which this country needs.  I know how nuclear power works and I know that it can provide the affordable energy which this country needs.

3.      Do you think the U.S. should start using nuclear energy and why?

Building off your previous question, the United States currently has 104 nuclear power plants in operation today producing 20% of this nation’s electricity.  I grew up outside of Detroit and had no idea that Fermi Nuclear Generating Station is 60 miles from my parent’s house!  California has four nuclear power plants, two in San Louis Obispo at Diablo Canyon Power Plant and two near San Diego at San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station. 

Nuclear must be a part of this nation’s energy portfolio for the future because it is a reliable source of base-load energy.  By 2030, when you are in your 30s, the United States will need 25% more power than it needs today.  We cannot supply that amount of energy without including more nuclear plants. 

            4.      What are the risks of dealing with nuclear waste?

All forms of large-scale energy production have some amount of waste.  The benefit of nuclear fuel is that it is solid before and after it is used.  We can easily contain 100% of the nuclear fuel which we use to produce power.  This waste is radioactive and must be handled with respect; however we know how to handle this used fuel in a safe way and have done so for over 40 years. 

      5.      How much nuclear radiation can you withstand before side effects occur?

 Radiation is measured in what is called “rem” and “millirem.” 100-200 rems will cause side effects; however, nuclear power plant workers receive tiny amounts of dose, if any, in the millirem range.  1000 millirem = 1 rem

I think your concern here is for any dose received at a nuclear power plant.  The radiation levels are closely monitored and every worker wears a device called a dosimeter which measures the amount, in millirems, which every worker receives.  This amount is very small compared to what we receive on a daily basis from nature.  The largest radiation source, radon, is a naturally occurring radioactive gas that comes from the Earth’s crust.  Other natural contributors of radiation are cosmic rays from the sun and radioactive materials in the rocks and soil.

One thing to remember is that radiation is used every day in hospitals, doctor and dental offices across America.  Radiation is used in X-Ray machines and to treat cancer.  It is also used to sterilize products which we use daily and eliminates bacteria in the food we eat in a process called irradiation.  Radiation is used in nearly all fields of modern science.  

 6.      What are the costs?

 Nuclear is a low cost energy producer.  Nuclear costs 1.76 cents/kWh, Coal 2.47 cents/kWh and gas 10.26 cents/kWh. 

Looking at your next question, I don’t think you are asking about the monetary costs.  All power production has some amount of risk, however nuclear has the least amount of risk.  Nuclear has a proven safety record, in the United States and the Western world no one has died as a result of a nuclear accident. 

 7.      What are the benefits?

There are many benefits of nuclear power.  As I said before, nuclear energy can provide base-load energy, this means it provides a constant amount of power to heat your home, provide lights and power your cell phone.  The average power plant supplies enough energy for 630,000 people each year, or a city the size of Seattle! 

Another benefit for nuclear power is that it provides jobs to Americans.  One power plant will supply 400-700 permanent, high paying jobs to those in the local area. 

One large benefit of nuclear power is that it produces electricity with out releasing carbon emissions into the environment.  Nuclear generated electricity avoids almost 700 million metric tons of carbon dioxide per year in the United States.  This is nearly as much carbon dioxide as is released from all passenger cars in the U.S.!

 8.      Do you think nuclear energy a good answer for the future and why?

Nuclear energy is a good answer for the electricity needs of America because it can supply the nation with large amounts of reliable energy.  Nuclear power plants do not produce green house gasses and the amount of carbon dioxide emissions they prevent is larger than all other electricity sources combined.  America’s energy portfolio must be diversified and nuclear must be a part of this mix. 

Thank you for your interest in nuclear power.  Please take the time to do research and look at the facts.  There are many links and videos on this website which can help you out.  Remember to learn for yourself!      

Money is being dumped everywhere the nation ‘needs’ it.  Is it helping?  I guess it is.  Do we see the so called stimulus stimulating anything (the other day my engineering buddy was laid off)?  So I can not say for sure. 

What I can say for sure is that if the DOE LOAN guarantees are passed and raised by $36 Billion dollars for the expansion of NEW NUCLEAR someone will be getting a job, and by someone I mean some thousands.  Let just do a little guess-ti-ment. 

Two new nuclear plants on one site=(500 plant design engineers across the country)+(1600 plant operating jobs)+(5000 construction jobs)+(200 new homes to place the workers in)+(5 Hotels for Outage workers)+(20 community infrastructure, stores, restaurants, ect)+(20Teachers for workers children)+(20 Fabrication Shops )+(Steel Production industry)+(Concrete Industry)+(Computer Industry)+ETC……………… I tierd of going on.  Lets just say 15,000 good paying jobs!  And that’s being conservative. 

Lets not forget that this money is not being given out, but presented as a LOAN guarantee, not a BAILOUT, so lets hope that the goverment doesn’t sell us out.

 Not only does nuclear power serve the community with producing clean, safe, and reliable power for the United States, but the nuclear industry is continuously looking for opportunities to improve the quality of life for U.S. citizens!  On Tuesday, January 19, 2010, Exelon Nuclear and GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy (GEH) announced a partnership to pilot the production of cobalt-60 which will be used in the treatment of certain cancers, the sterilization of medical devices (syringes, bandages, etc.), and for the decontamination and preservation of food and cosmetics (also known as irradiation).  Clinton Power Station, located in Clinton, IL, will serve as the project’s host facility and is looking forward to providing enough cobalt-60 for approximately 300,000 cancer treatments once the pilot project is complete.  This project is essential to secure future U.S. cobalt-60 supplies due to the dwindling supplies from Canada, Argentina and Russia (Exelon Nuclear).

On Friday, January, 15, 2010, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) approved a license amendment that permits the station to participate in the pilot project and the rods will be placed into the Clinton reactor during its current planned maintenance and refueling outage.  The cobalt-60 production will not affect the plant’s ability to safely produce electricity and the safe production of electricity is always the industries first priority (Exelon Nuclear).

The Science Behind the Project

The cobalt-59 rods will be inserted into the Clinton reactor and will remain in place for four to six years.  During this period of time, the cobalt-59 atoms will pick up an extra neutron and become cobalt-60.

The first cobalt-60 shipment from Clinton Power Station will contain only one rod and will be shipped to a GEH processing facility in 2012.  “The highly secure shipments are regulated by the NRC and the Department of Homeland Security and tracked through the NRC’s National Source Tracking System” (Exelon Nuclear). Once the shipment arrives at a GEH facility, GEH will then process, transport, and sell the cobalt-60 to the medical and food sterilization industries.  It is estimated that the first supply of cobalt-60 from the project will be available for commercial use in 2014 (Exelon Nuclear).

The nuclear industry is looking forward to supporting these partnerships to help save lives and better the quality of life for American citizens.

Clinton Power Station, Clinton, IL (Photo Courtesy of Exelon Nuclear)

Reference:

Exelon Nuclear. Communications. Exelon and GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy Partner on Pilot to Produce Compound Used in Medical and Food Industries.  Warrenville, IL: Exelon Nuclear, 2001. Print

On Monday I attended an American Nuclear Society meeting.  The guest speaker was my company’s Federal Regulatory Affairs Analyst (essentially our lobbyist).  He was telling us about the perceptions of legislators regarding nuclear power and its role in the climate change debate and legislation.  Interestingly, when both Democrat and Republican legislators were polled (anonymously) regarding whether they would support a “cap and trade” bill if it included nuclear power, 81% of Democrats said yes, while only 3% of Republicans said yes.  For Republicans it had nothing to do with nuclear and everything to do with “cap and trade.”  With mid-term elections in 2010, this will be an interesting debate.  What are your thoughts on “cap and trade”, climate change legislation, and the impact on the nuclear industry?

Clean Energy America’s Dena Volovar will join distinguished panelists at the University of Colorado-Boulder on November 5th.  See below for details.

5:00 - 7:00 p.m., Thursday, November 5, 2009

Wittemyer Coutroom, Wolf Law Building
University of Colorado Law School
(2450 Kittredge Loop Road, Boulder, CO 80309)

Please join us for a special event that will rigorously examine the key economic, environmental, and technological issues of nuclear power generation.

This event is free and open to the public. Following the event, there will be a public reception with light refreshments provided.

For more information on this event, please contact CEES at cees@colorado.edu and visit http://cees.colorado.edu/nuclear_power_nov_5.html

Distinguished Speakers

Dena Volovar, Clean Energy America; Project Manager, Bechtel Corporation
James McNeil, Professor of Physics, Colorado School of Mines
Jerry Peterson, Professor of Physics, University of Colorado at Boulder
Arjun Makhijani, President of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research

Moderator: Len Ackland, Professor of Journalism, University of Colorado at Boulder

Event Sponsors

Center for Energy and Environmental Security (CEES)
University of Colorado at Boulder (UCB)
UCB Renewable and Sustainable Energy Institute (RASEI)
Colorado School of Mines (CSM)
Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI)

According to the Wall Street Journal (September 3, 2009) in an article titled “Spain’s Solar-Power Collapse Dims Subsidy Model” they conclude that “The industry’s fundamental problem is that, without subsidies, it’s still not economically viable.  An interesting quote from Mike Ahearn, chief executive of Tempe, Arizona-based First Solar Corp.  Solar power could be competitive “within a couple of years” but only if the industry gains scale.  That would require generous government subsidies and other forms of support, Mr. Ahearn says: “It’s a chicken-and-egg” problem.

Finally the auto industry is listening to their customers.  GM’s new Chevy Volt averages 230 mpg and goes on sale in another year.  The $40,000 price tag is a little lofty in this struggling economy, but for those who can afford to be environmentally friendly; this car could be worth it. 

All you need to do is plug in your car overnight and it’s good to go in the morning.  There’s the catch, you’re plugging your car into the power grid.  Already Congress is dealing with America’s struggling power grid.  California already has had rolling ‘brown-outs’ in the past years.  What is going to happen when we add several thousand cars to that grid? 

We need more electricity as a country and with each new electric car we’re hiking up that number pretty fast.  How are we going to meet this hefty demand?  If you want to keep your car truly ‘green’ then we can’t be building more coal or natural gas power plants.  That’s only shifting the emissions from your tailpipe to the smoke-stack. 

Nuclear power is the best choice.  We have the technology to build enough plants to supply the US with the increase in nuclear power.  The other clean alternatives, wind and solar, have many years of research and development before they can even come close to catching up to nuclear power production. 

Now is the time to build more nuclear power so that in the years to come when you plug in your clean car, it can truly be clean from the outlet to the road. 

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/chevy-volt-boon-or-boondoggle-2009-08-11