Waste disposal bedevils Senate consensus on nuclear bill
Bipartisan agreement on the virtues of a bill to encourage new nuclear energy technologies, S. 903, the Nuclear Energy Leadership Act, appeared to fracture during a Senate committee hearing Tuesday over the ongoing debate regarding a permanent storage site for nuclear waste.
U.S. Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV) said she is concerned that the bill, known as NELA, and a new Senate measure introduced this week called the Nuclear Waste Administration Act does not go far enough to clarify states’ rights in creating a permanent long-term storage facility for nuclear waste. She worries about the preemption of her state’s rights to reject a storage facility even though the new measure which proscribes a consent-based review process does not address the ongoing debate over citing the storage facility in Nevada’s Yucca Mountain.
The waste disposal bill focuses on a number of proposals. First, it seeks to resolve the long-embattled license of the Yucca Mountain facility and allow a formal licensing process to determine if the facility can even be licensed and built. It also seeks to revamp the financing mechanism of this whole process and guarantee the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) advances a temporary storage program while work on Yucca Mountain continues — even if that has them turn to private interests. It also aims to strengthen the DOE’s program management and organization to make the whole process more efficient.
U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) said during a hearing of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources the new measure will go a long way towards resolving the decades-long debate over siting a permanent storage facility by authorizing intermediate storage sites, including pending applications for sites in New Mexico and Texas, but it does not address or even mention Yucca Mountain.
U.S. Sen. Angus King (I-ME) worried about promoting the expansion of nuclear power without resolving the long-term storage issue. “I think we’ve got it backward. We need to solve the problem first,” he said.
U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), chairman of the committee and sponsor of the new bill, agreed that resolving the long-time debate over a permanent storage site is critical to moving forward on NELA and other efforts to renew the nation’s nuclear energy prowess. “As we talk about the technology of the future we also have to realize we have a legacy from the past,” said Murkowski.
NELA would do several things, including create demonstration projects for at least two advanced nuclear reactors by the end of 2025 and two to five more by the end of 2035; authorize the federal government to enter into long-term power purchase agreements with nuclear energy providers; create a pilot program for long-term power purchase agreements for technologies that could expand the use of certain nuclear technologies for use in other technologies, like desalinization; direct the DOE to construct a versatile reactor-based fast neutron source; provide an initial supply of fuel for early advanced reactors; and establish a program to fund greater research at the university level.
A major goal is to develop nuclear technologies that will facilitate smaller, more efficient and cost-effective nuclear plants. “I’m particularly excited about a subcategory of advanced reactors called microreactors, which have off-grid capability and could help provide clean, affordable energy in remote towns and villages,” said Murkowski.
Dr. Mark Peters, laboratory director at Idaho National Laboratory, said during the hearing that some utilities – and the U.S. Department of Defense – are thinking even smaller. Westinghouse, NuScale, General Atomics, Oklo, X-energy, and others are working on microreactor designs. These two- to 20-megawatt reactors could provide electricity for military bases and remote communities that run their electrical grids on imported diesel, said Peters.
Industry experts praised the bill during Tuesday’s hearing as a way to revive the nuclear power industry in a carbon-free way.
“Nuclear energy is a vital element in helping the world to avoid the worst impacts of climate change, and U.S. leadership in the field serves U.S. economic, environmental, and security interests,” Dr. Ashley Finan, executive director of the Nuclear Innovation Alliance, told the committee.
“In order for the advanced reactor community to be successful, the NRC’s regulatory structure for licensing advanced reactors must be efficient and effective and the companies must have access to the necessary research infrastructure,” said Maria Korsnick, president and CEO of the Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry lobby group.
Senators raised a variety of questions, some of which have no answers yet.
U.S. Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM) asked about promises to lower costs of producing nuclear power. Several of the panelists told him new technologies are going to be more efficient.
Sen. Cortez Masto asked how the bill is going to help reduce nuclear waste. Peters said the projected technologies will produce higher enrichment and create more energy. Korsnick said some of the technologies will enable the use of recycled fuel.
U.S. Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) asked about intellectual property protections if the technology is to be exported. Jeffrey Merrifield, former commissioner at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and now a partner at Pillsbury Law Firm, said the existing framework for protecting IP works well. Peters said the various laboratories are working with DOE on strengthening IP protections.
