Idaho Ponders Its Nuclear Future

Idaho Governor Butch Otter

Nuclear Notes highlighted Governor Butch Otter’s Leadership in Nuclear Energy commission when he formed it last February. Now, the group is beginning to issue reports.

Governor C.L. “Butch” Otter today encouraged the people of Idaho to review the progress of his Leadership in Nuclear Energy (LINE) Commission and to begin a public dialogue on critical questions facing the Idaho National Laboratory and their potential impact on Idaho’s economy.

This might sound like an "uh-oh, maybe this isn’t going to go so well" sort of moment, but Governor Otter is actually quite the fan of INL:

“The timing was right for an extensive, external review of INL and nuclear-related activities in Idaho,” Governor Otter said. “I think this progress report clearly points out that the environmental cleanup envisioned by my predecessors has largely been realized while at the same time we’ve established INL as the nation’s preeminent nuclear research and development laboratory. There’s been significant economic benefit to the entire state. As we sustain and even try to build on that in the future, the Commission is working to answer some tough questions and I applaud its effort to involve the public in that discussion before making final recommendations.”

If you look at the news clips on his home page, you’ll see that Otter is very engaged with energy issues. This we already knew. The commission and its report are something else again and show the state really grappling with where it wants to go with nuclear energy, with INL representing an Idaho success story, Clearly, Otter wants to expand that success into related areas. The questions about INL and nuclear energy in Idaho that the commission was charged with reviewing are really worthwhile:

In its final report to the Governor, the Commission will use the subcommittee recommendations, input from the public and its own deliberations to finalize recommendations on the following questions:

1. What strategic role can the INL and Idaho’s nuclear industry play in the country’s energy future?
2. In light of reduced federal spending, what impacts may affect INL and what role can Idaho play to protect INL research and cleanup funding?
3. What broad environmental risks are posed by nuclear technologies and what mitigating steps are reasonable to protect public health and the environment from current and future applications of nuclear technology in Idaho?
4. Where is nuclear technology going and what role and/or opportunities exist for INL and Idaho companies in those technology developments?
5. Given the Blue Ribbon Commission focus on consent-based siting and the suspension of the Yucca Mountain repository, in what way can Idaho’s 1995 Settlement Agreement protect the State’s interests to support and enhance research and development at INL and complete the cleanup mission?
6. How can Idaho’s universities influence, support and participate in the future of nuclear energy, nuclear workforce development, and advancements in nuclear technologies?
7. Following the impacts of the Fukushima tsunami and the recent market impact of natural gas, what future role will nuclear energy play in the nation’s energy policies and what can Idaho do to prepare for that future?

Some of the answers here may seem self-evident to nuclear advocates, but all are worth answering to create a meaningful report.

The commission’s progress report Otter refers to above is here. It’s worth a complete read, though the agreements between Idaho and INL to safeguard nuclear materials on the INL site and clean up waste takes up a lot of pages. (Long story short: the effort has been very successful. Still, it’s very specific where most of the report is concerned with more general – and, from my perspective, more broadly applicable – topics.)

I liked this bit about the post Fukushima environment for nuclear energy (page 28):

Outside of Europe and Japan, the concerns raised by Fukushima are not diminishing this long-term international interest and demand for nuclear energy. Regulators in the U.S. and in other leading nuclear nations are responding prudently and putting necessary changes in place to deal with extreme external events and improve public confidence. While the safety of the global nuclear enterprise should become even better as result of these efforts, many of post-Fukushima recommendations had already been implemented in the U.S. after 9/11.

This is quite true – no doubt why I like it – and very straightforwardly expressed – not as common as it should be. I’ll just highlight one more thing before leaving the rest to you – the recommendation that Idaho host an interim storage facility for used nuclear fuel, as first promoted by the President’s blue ribbon commission (page 36):

As the lead US Regional Interim Storage facility, demonstrate full scale technology, licensing, and operations for the nation’s regional used fuel storage facilities.
• Considerable investments (100s of million dollar) into RD&D infrastructure at the site with additional jobs
• Investments into fuel cycle options demonstrations at engineering scale (100s of jobs)
• Spinoffs commercializing innovative technologies

Jobs, good salaries, the potential to seed commercial activity: Idaho sees the possibilities. This is part of a strong list of nuclear-related activities that the commission recommends Idaho consider.
This is one of the most thorough looks at nuclear energy and its potential that I’ve seen from a state. Other states could easily use it as a model if they are similarly interested.

Read More

Examining the Data in the INL Cave

Thanks to the folks at the ANS Nuclear Cafe for pointing to this video from Idaho National Laboratory's Center for Advanced Energy Research. It's all about the CAVE: a "computer assisted virtual environment" that enables researchers "to literally walk into their data and examine it."

Very cool stuff. Leave your comments here, or over at Reddit.

Read More

In Idaho, Japan and Finland

A little story appearing in the Spokane (Wash.) Spokesman-Review:

Gov. Butch Otter today signed an executive order creating the “Idaho Leadership in Nuclear Energy Commission,” or LINE Commission, to identify “opportunities and challenges associated with hosting the Idaho National Laboratory,” the nuclear facility in eastern Idaho. “Idaho clearly has been a recognized leader in nuclear energy research, development and demonstration for over 60 years,” Otter said. “We’ve also borne environmental burdens, but significant progress has been made in cleanup that enables us to focus more attention on the long-term viability and mission relevance of the INL.”

I wasn’t sure what this meant, exactly – the name of the commission suggests that the goal is to promote INL as a notable state entity, but the text is a little more nuanced. Maybe that’s just how Gov. Otter goes about things:

Otter's executive order on Wednesday reinforces his support of the industry's presence in eastern Idaho - even amid concern that a French company, Areva, could abandon plans to build a $3 billion uranium enrichment facility west of Idaho Falls.

So there is a plus as well as a minus value – I have no special knowledge of AREVA’s plans – but if Otter aims to promote the viability of Idaho for nuclear energy-related projects due to INL’s presence, well, he’s in the right state to do that.

---

Japan’s efforts to gain a consensus that will allow it to turn its nuclear facilities back on appears to be showing results:

Japanese governor Tokihiro Nakamura believes nuclear power is vital for the resource-poor land, but even he says the central government must put safety pledges in writing before he'll agree to restart off-line reactors -- a sign of the tough battle ahead to repair tattered public trust after the Fukushima crisis.

I guess you could call that the opening bid. Nakamura wants more, too:

"It is the central government that must take ultimate responsibility, so at the very least, the trade and industry minister should come to the prefecture and discuss this with me openly," Nakamura, whose Ehime prefecture in western Japan hosts Shikoku Electric Power Co.'s Ikata nuclear power plant.

None of that sounds unreasonable, though some ministers will be doing a lot of travelling as more of the governors decide what will help them decide about the facilities in their localities.It’s worth doing, even if there’s a fair amount of it to do.

At least Nakamura is disinclined to be a dope about this:

Nakamura, a 52-year-old former member of parliament, said electricity supply in the summer, when annual demand usually peaks, was likely to be tight in his region if no reactors came back on line.

"In this situation, I think they will have to be restarted at some point," he said.

Hopefully, after Nakamura receives his visitors and gets the signed safety documents, Ikata can start up again.

---

I’m not an expert on financial stuff, so I generally have to take news like this at face value:

The restoration of some nuclear plants helped Finnish utility Fortum's power generation business turn more profitable in the fourth-quarter, the company said on Wednesday.

The power generation unit's comparable operating profit, which excludes hedging, rose 4.5 percent from a year earlier to 351 million euros ($459 million), beating forecasts.

Good for Fortum.

"Utilization rate at Fortum's nuclear power plants in Sweden was good," said Nordea analyst Pasi Vaisanen.

Even better. This part I get, as one tends to forget that nuclear power plants, while expensive to build, are quite inexpensive to run. That’s good for the bottom line. The story has more on the financial situation if that interests you.

Idaho National Labs. Looks lonely out there.

Read More