White House Reaffirms Commitment To Nuclear Energy

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House said on Monday President Barack Obama remains committed to keeping nuclear energy as part of the energy mix despite concerns about its safety after the earthquake in Japan.

"It remains a part of the president's overall energy plan," White House spokesman Jay Carney said about nuclear energy.

Nuclear is an integral part of the Clean Energy Standard that Obama has been pushing to win support for reducing dependence on oil and coal.

The plan requires power companies to produce 80 percent of their electricity from clean sources including natural gas, "clean coal," renewables like solar and wind power, and nuclear by 2035.

Obama included nuclear in the plan to help win support for it from Republicans. A single nuclear plant provides hundreds of jobs in construction, maintenance and security.

The United States has more than 100 nuclear power reactors that provide about 20 percent of the country's electricity, all virtually free of greenhouse gas emissions.

Analysts said unless things take a drastic turn for the worse at Japan's stricken nuclear plants, the United States may still move forward cautiously on nuclear.

"Barring a life-threatening meltdown in Japan or significantly increased public anxiety over radioactive fallout, we do not expect a new nuclear licensing moratorium," said Whitney Stanco, an energy policy analyst at MF Global.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission hopes to decide by the end of the year whether to approve construction licenses for four new reactors.

Stanco said regulators will be under pressure to outline how the proposals are safer than the older technologies used at the plants damaged in Japan.

(Reporting by Jeff Mason and Timothy Gardner)

Copyright 2010 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions.

Comments

[thetruth92802]

11:40 PM on 03/21/2011

double standard

[CLASSWARWELOST]

02:57 PM on 03/16/2011

White House reaffirms commitment to fascism over the saftey of the people. Nothing like a disaster can stand in the way of his true commitments. .Worst offshore oil leak in history and a week later he is back to supporting offshore drilling- something he was against when campaiging. A man with real integrity - not. .

[WonderingNThinking]

04:16 AM on 03/16/2011

I want a nuclear licensing moratorium. That should be the first order of business for congress next week.

Make up for power losses by requiring the sale of only energy efficient appliances and new housing/buildings built with solar (when applicable), well insulated, fluorescent or led fixtures, low flow toilets and faucets (saves energy to produce clean water).

[steelej]

11:12 PM on 03/15/2011

Why is this buried and not on the front page at least intermittently? 56 comments? Lindsey Lohan gets that many in fifteen seconds.

[bhaines213]

07:28 PM on 03/15/2011

We shouldn’t have nuclear energy in this country until we can get to a point where we can trust the regulators and inspectors. We’re at a point where politics and cronyism influence everything and things seem to be getting worse instead of better.

Can you imagine a nuclear power plant being built with contractor with the business ethics of Halliburton and Xe (Blackwater)? How safe would we be if the regulators and the inspectors had the knowledge and level of experience of someone like Michael (heck of a job Brownie) Brown?

Even if Pres. Obama were willing and able to purge all of the corrupt contractors and political cronies from the Executive Branch, there’s currently no way to prevent them from coming back in a future administration since big donors and lobbyist rule the government.

Also, we would still have to worry about the Legislative Branch and our current highly political Supreme Court.

[bhaines213]

09:52 PM on 03/15/2011

I wanted to add that even if a nuclear power plant were built with the best engineers, and the best design with no cutting corners and no bribes, we still would have the question of where it would be located.

I wouldn’t want it anywhere near where I live and I think most people feel the same. This decision alone could bring politics and prejudice back into the equation. All kind of dangerous facilities tend to be located near people who don’t have power or influence.

As Eugene Robinson says in today’s Washington Post “improbable does not mean impossible” and “it can happen here”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/japans_nuclear_crisis_might_not_be_the_last/2011/03/14/ABzLmtV_story.html?nav=emailpage

[CLASSWARWELOST]

03:02 PM on 03/16/2011

Shy don't we put them outside gated communities and where ever else the rich live. .

[Doug Watt]

03:32 PM on 03/15/2011

If anything demonstrates Obama's fealty to big corporations, this is it. While it has been released that the GE designed reactors in Japan had massive flaws from the beginning and countries like Germany and France are either shutting down similar plants of testing them all, Obama wants to be sure to let GE know he's all for them no matter what.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/15/business/global/15euronuke.html?_r=2&ref=asia

[Machiventa68]

12:06 PM on 03/15/2011

Sometimes politicians have to "save face" and remain positive in the wake of events like the Japanese earthquake. I understand that mentality, but here's a simple question: Just what community in the United States will want a new nuclear power plant built in their neighborhood after what has happened in Japan?

There might be some places that would give the OK for a new nuclear plant, but most cities and states will be extremely dubious about nuclear power for years to come. Consider the situation if the San Onofre nuclear facility was melting down right now and the southern California coast had been inundated with a tsunami.

[WonderingNThinking]

04:16 AM on 03/16/2011

I do! I do! Sign me up!

NOT!!!!

[Esther Max]

08:13 AM on 03/15/2011

I just wonder why not develop a safe source of energy such as a
magnetic generator
and get rid of all these toxic energy plants around the world

[lentinelia]

06:38 AM on 03/15/2011

Obama won't let facts get in the way of his ambition.

[steelej]

11:14 PM on 03/15/2011

No more or less ambitious than his right-wing tool counterparts and baggers. They're all the same.

[pleaseforce]

02:41 AM on 03/15/2011

This last Saturday night in Nor Cal a few of us at dinner discussed the likelihood of radioactive exposure becoming a near term issue along the West Coast. Long story short, several of us are now in Colorado. Once the real news gets out, it may be difficult to leave on highways, trains or planes. Obama knows all about the pending dangers of course. But his backers have his mouth stuffed with cash. And yes, I voted for him too.

[Doug Watt]

04:50 PM on 03/15/2011

Yes, the smog blows here from Japan, it makes sense that a radioactive cloud will end up here as well. The government won't tell us until after the fact. I have ordered Potassium Iodide pills and I hope they get here in time.

[IfIonlyknew]

06:12 PM on 03/15/2011

You are moving in the right direction.

[WonderingNThinking]

04:18 AM on 03/16/2011

I am on the fence about leaving. Watching carefully. Thinking about doing it tomorrow or Thursday. Taking care of business first.

[MSROADKILL612]

02:31 AM on 03/15/2011

A sage mate of mine proposed a good solution to waste and proliferation. Uranium is an oligopolistic market. OZ has 40% of it. There are similar recycling models out there.

You sell it, you take back the waste (forces vendor nations to make a serious investment in safe storage (OZ is ideally suited - tectonically, climatically, geographically and politically) and reprocessing). No Waste, no more sales to you (cures proliferation).

All this should be charged handsomely for. Not a problem. The fuel costs are a pittance compared to all others.

Customers and producers who wont abide by this paradigm should be heavily sanctioned, as should corporates who do business with them.

Countries unfortunate enough to be earthquake prone, will simply have to outsource their heavy power consuming industries like aluminium (which OZ has scads of) production, to countries which are not. My guess is japan does a lot of it - wrong. Less shipping anyway (refined product vs ore).