Miracles do occur: $50 billion in toxic pork for nuclear energy axed from Stimulus Bill

Posted on

"Miracles do occur: $50 billion in toxic pork for nuclear energy axed from Stimulus Bill"

Sometimes Congress does kill bad ideas — or in this case $50B in high-risk, job-killing nuclear loans that were put in the stimulus through fraudulent budget gimmickry.

According to an email I was forwarded from Beyond Nuclear:

Congressional negotiators in the House of Representatives and the Senate agreed tonight on a $789 billion stimulus bill but killed an attempt to squander $50 billion on new nuclear reactors.

The agreement, made in conference committee, axed a proposal from Sen. Bennett (R-UT) to include $50 billion in pork barrel federal loan guarantees for the nuclear industry. The Congressional Budget Office stated earlier this year that the industry would likely default on more than half the loans, leaving taxpayers and ratepayers to foot the bill.

“This is a big victory for common sense and the American taxpayer,” said Kevin Kamps of Beyond Nuclear who helped lead the campaign on Capitol Hill to cut the $50 billion from the bill. “This toxic nuclear pork had no place in a bill designed to put Americans back to work and salvage our economy. Our legislators are to be applauded for getting their priorities right and saying no to yet another blatant attempt to prop up an industry that has never stood on its own financial feet.

“The nuclear industry has received an estimated $500 billion dollars in public subsidies over the past half century,” Kamps added. “This monumental waste of money had to end. The nuclear energy industry cannot solve the climate crisis and fattening the nuclear calf has deprived real energy solutions like renewable energy and energy efficiency programs from essential support for decades.”

Kudos to the conference committee.

« »

9 Responses to Miracles do occur: $50 billion in toxic pork for nuclear energy axed from Stimulus Bill

  1. Joe says:

    Where then do you propose to get power from in the long run if not nuclear? Clean coal?

    [JR: Efficiency, wind, solar thermal baseload, solar PV, geothermal....]

  2. KeepNVStrong says:

    Great news. “When you notice you’re in a hole, the first step is to stop digging.” Pursuing the fantasy of “safe, limitless nuclear power” has been a costly sideshow that’s kept action off in the future, when we desperately need action now.

    For $50B we could have about 15-20 GW of concentrating solar power plants, which would deliver reliable energy at the time of day when it’s most needed. With the transmission package in the stimulus bill we could start to deliver energy not just in the Southwest, but nationwide. The power will be cheaper than nuclear, zero risk, and will last essentially forever. Half a dozen companies are ready to build it now.

    Let’s git a’building.

    Great news.

  3. Bob Wright says:

    Whether or not you support nuclear as part of the GHG solution, the $50B has better uses right now in jump starting the economy.

    Assuming the stimulus package is getting direction from the White House, its obvious nuclear is part of the administration’s GHG reduction strategy, and this money was to keep it in play without separate legislation. Pork? Maybe.

  4. Robbrian says:

    For those who want to know “from whence will America obtain energy for now and the long term” I submit the following llink for those interested in a dialogue of substance.

    http://robbrian.squarespace.com/energy-policy-considerations/

    I sent Secretary Chu the letter yesterday.

    Briefly, the most efficient alternative for the long term is hydrokinetics. Our oceans and streams, even sluiceways can be exploited for energy feeds into an appropriately modified national grid as well as distributive systems for as long as water flows.

  5. I’m thrilled by this rare victory for common sense. through conservation and truly green energy renewable sources, we can easily meet our needs.

    Shel Horowitz, author of Principled Profit: Marketing That Puts People First

  6. Modesty says:

    Kudos to the conference committee and to the political activists, community organizers, random volunteers, bloggers, and those who simply interact honestly in the public domain, thanks to whom, common sense is on a roll.

  7. Rick C says:

    I’m dancing in the isles!

  8. John Hollenberg says:

    They also stripped out money to research “Clean Coal” (an oxymoron if I ever heard one)!

    http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2009/2/12/83439/6486

  9. Ike Solem says:

    The reality is not quite as rosy as it looks. This same issue arose in 2007, when the nuclear industry tried to force $50 billion in loan guarantees through. Historically, nuclear and coal and oil have received giant federal subsidies in the form of loan guarantees, tax breaks, and direct subsidies via zero-oversight federal contracting deals. Despite popular pressure to roll back these subsidies and promises by politicians to do so, they largely remain intact – only gross expansions of these subsidies have been defeated – and according to reports, the $2 billion for the FutureGen “clean coal” project remains in the bill.

    That’s $2 billion for one generation plant using an apparently failed technology. (The U.S. federal budget for ALL solar photovoltaic research is about 1/20th of that, $100 million) The technology is secret and proprietary and is controlled by a financial consortium of private coal interests (i.e. Southern, Peabody, BHPBilliton, etc.) and military government contractors (Battelle, the primary organizer). There are no published papers on the technology, which they refuse to talk about because it is proprietary. Try asking the technical advisers about it:

    http://www.futuregenalliance.org/alliance/advisors.stm

    Battelle is the world’s largest private research corporation, who manages five National Labs for the Department of Energy and plays the leading role in the U.S. biological warfare program, as well as in many other areas of military and commercial R&D. They are the proprietary controllers of FutureGen technology, and they’ve never published anything on it either. Despite the public financing of the project, Battelle insists that only “non-proprietary performance data” can be released, whatever that means. Fraud is the most likely story here.

    The fact of the matter is that carbon sequestration-based coal combustion does not work, and will never work, on simple physical arguments. There’s also no prototype – for example, a car that drives down the road while capturing all CO2 emissions in the trunk. Try sticking a potato in the tailpipe – that’s what all CO2 sequestration involves – massive power losses. It’s likely that if you could design a coal plant that captured 90% of its CO2 emissions, it would only produce 10% of the power (per ton of coal) that a dirty modern coal plant does. There’s no way around it, especially if the coal is loaded up with sulfur and mercury and arsenic, as is typical.

    What we don’t see is $2 billion to build an integrated wind-solar power system with backup biomass generations in some city as a test case. They are doing this in Germany – but not here. The reason for that is that the Democratic politicians from the coal states are dedicated supporters of the coal industry, and yes, that does include Obama and Dick Durbin, as well as Jeff Bingaman.

    The last thing the coal industry wants to see is a city anywhere in the U.S. that operates entirely on renewable power – but it can be done, and it would be the perfect example. $2 billion would be a good initial investment – but there would be howls from the fossil fuel industry, that’s for sure – and they own Congress, more or less. You don’t see oil executives and coal executives being hauled before Congress the way the auto and finance executives were, do you? And no one is asking financiers why they are investing their bailout money in fossil fuels and not in renewables, either. (Bloomberg reported that Morgan Stanley and Citigroup were buying oil up and storing it in supertankers – a way to drive up the price, or to reserve oil for when prices rise – and these banks are also invested in fossil fuels, thanks to the repeal of Glass-Steagall banking rules c.1999 – and that’s why those rules were put in place – banks should not be able to loan their customer’s money to firms that they hold shares in, period).

    I would put the celebrations on hold – this stimulus package is the equivalent of a band aid on a shark bite. There’s a whole lot of work to be done still, and the issues are very complicated. This was not a defeat for coal interests – they lost nothing, and even gained a little something. It would be a lot easier if the press would honestly cover this story, but they haven’t.