[NukeNet] Lieberman-Warner bill follow-up

[Michael Mariotte]

May 9, 2008

 

Dear Friends:

 

Thanks to all of you who were on last week's national grassroots
conference call on the Lieberman-Warner climate change bill.

 

For those of you who were on the call (and those of you who weren't able
to be on as well!), this is our first follow-up message, which includes
some of the materials that were promised on that call.

 

Below is a sample op-ed you can submit to your local media. It is
currently about 600 words. There is a place for you to add info relevant
to your own state and/or senators. Please feel free to use this how you
wish and change it how you wish.

 

Below that is the text of proposed Minnesota legislation on radiation
monitoring that was referred to on the call. We the People's petition
calling for an independent investigation of the NRC, referred to on the
call, can be signed at
http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?020507
 

Beyond Nuclear is setting up a Washington press conference to focus
attention on the nuclear subsidies and probable nuclear amendments to
the Lieberman-Warner bill. It is tentatively scheduled for May 20. We
will let you know once it is confirmed so you may plan local press
events as well.

 

We encourage all of you to set up appointments with your Senators during
the Memorial Day recess (May 24-June 1), when most will be back in their
states.

 

And we also encourage you to activate phone trees, e-mail lists, etc.
now. One thing that is clear in our meetings with Senate staff is that
most offices are not receiving phone calls on the nuclear issue. We have
to change that, and deluge every office with calls!

 

Next week, we'll be sending a general Alert to our larger e-mail lists
(you'll be receiving that Alert too). We're also planning a national
call-in day (but don't wait for that to start!), and we'll be
circulating a sign-on letter as well.

 

As a reminder, here are some of the key nuclear issues related to
Lieberman-Warner:

 

*the carbon trading system established by the bill would ultimately
create a fund of some $500 billion or more that could be used for
nuclear power over the next 30-40 years. Even so, the bill's emissions
reductions targets are well below what science says are needed to avert
the worst impact of climate change.

 

Not content to stop there, the nuclear industry will be looking for
amendments to provide them with more taxpayer money. Possibilities that
have been discussed include:

 

*money for training nuclear engineers

*money for training skilled workers (like welders)

*money for security guards and improvements

*money for Hardened On-Site Storage

*money to build new factories to manufacture large reactor components

*money for new transmission lines

*money for transformers

*more money for taxpayer loan guarantees for new reactors

*more money for "risk" insurance if reactors are delayed because of
interventions or other licensing problems

*establishment of "interim" storage sites for high-level radioactive
waste

*speed-up of Yucca Mountain licensing

*further restrictions on public participation in reactor licensing

and the list goes on....

 

We hope this is helpful to you. As always, if you have questions or
comments, don't hesitate to contact us.

 

Michael Mariotte

Executive Director

Nuclear Information and Resource Service

nirsnet at nirs.org

www.nirs.org <http://www.nirs.org/> 

301-270-6477

 

Sample Op-Ed

Lieberman-Warner Bill: lots for nuclear power, not much for climate 

According to an aide to Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT), the
Lieberman-Warner climate change bill scheduled to be debated on the
Senate floor during the first week of June "would be the most historic
incentive for nuclear in the history of the United States."

 

Indeed, the cap-and-trade carbon emissions system that the bill would
establish would both make utility investments in carbon-emitting
technologies like coal and gas less economically competitive by putting
a price on carbon, and would also create a fund-totaling as much as $500
Billion over the next four decades-that could be used for nuclear power
investment.

 

There are many problems with the proposed Lieberman-Warner legislation,
not the least of which is that its emissions reductions targets fall far
short of what science now says is necessary to avoid a climate
catastrophe. In fact, the global carbon emissions reduction of 80% by
2050 called for by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Global
Climate Change translates into a 95% reduction in U.S. emissions-or
essentially a carbon-free energy economy.

 

You would think then, that nuclear power advocates would be staunch
supporters of the Lieberman-Warner bill, given the vast sums of money
for low-carbon energy projects it would produce and the need for even
greater emissions reductions.

 

But you would be wrong: the nuclear industry is looking for more, lots
more. And in the nuclear advocates' quest for more taxpayer money for
this industry-which already has received the lion's share of federal
energy dollars over the past 60 years-lies a disquieting truth the
industry would prefer the public not realize: the U.S. nuclear power
industry is currently incapable of building and operating any
significant increase in nuclear power generation.

 

Having already convinced Congress that nuclear power can be useful in
addressing climate-to the tune of $18.5 billion in taxpayer loan
guarantees approved last Fall-nuclear advocates are now planning to use
the Lieberman-Warner bill as a means of obtaining vast new federal
subsidies.

 

In backrooms on Capitol Hill, the nuclear lobby has been floating
amendments that would authorize billions of taxpayers dollars to train
nuclear engineers, to train skilled workers like welders, to pay for
security guards and on-site radioactive waste storage, to pay for
transmission lines and routers, and to build huge new facilities to
manufacture components like reactor pressure vessels (currently only one
facility, in Japan, can build pressure vessels, and it can produce only
4 per year).

 

But that's not all: some nuclear proponents (like Sen. Johnny Isakson,
R-GA) have floated ideas like numerous new tax credits for building and
operating atomic reactors; increasing the loan guarantee fund (since
$18.5 billion doesn't buy much nuclear power these days, it could cover
at most 3 reactors); setting up "temporary" radioactive waste dumps
pretty much anywhere the industry wants; further reducing already
marginal public and state government participation in the reactor
licensing process, and much more.

 

Should these amendments be adopted, the Lieberman-Warner bill would end
up doing very little to address climate change, but a whole lot to put
taxpayer money in the hands of the nuclear industry.

 

{Insert here how your Senators should vote on these amendments, and any
local angles]

 

One change that would improve the bill, however, would be an amendment
that would require money generated by the cap-and-trade system to be
used for the fastest, cheapest, safest and cleanest energy sources
possible. That would rule out nuclear power, of course, but if we are
serious about addressing climate change, it's one amendment that would
be a clear improvement to a wholly inadequate piece of legislation.

 

*Lieberman staff aide quote comes from Environment & Energy Daily,
February 8, 2008

 

 

Minnesota House File No. 2366

A bill for an act relating to public health; requiring a report of
radiation emissions in Monticello.

Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Minnesota:

Section 1. Commissioner of Health Report; Routine Radiation Emissions

The commissioner of health, in cooperation with the utility that owns a
facility in Monticello, shall issue a report detailing where routine
radiation releases go, and the health impacts of the radiation emissions
on affected communities. By January 1, 2008, the report shall be
distributed to house and senate committees having jurisdiction over
publich health and to all communities that are part of the emergency
response planning.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.energyjustice.net/pipermail/nukenet_energyjustice.net/attachments/20080509/bd78ee68/attachment.html