News
States to debate nuclear power
Conference to be held to discuss future of energy use within Minnesota, Wisconsin
Looking for a print version?
Simply use your browser’s ‘Print’ command and a printer-friendly document will be generated automatically.
Also by Ryan Rainey:
- Legality of campaign finance reform bill probed (November 20, 2009)
- Bill would legalize medical marijuana (November 17, 2009)
- GAB delays vote on system (November 10, 2009)
- State Legislature passes Supreme Court reform (November 6, 2009)
- Wisconsin Supreme Court hears lawsuit on civil unions (November 4, 2009)
Sharing tools:
E-mail this article:
Two grassroots pro-nuclear power groups from Wisconsin and Minnesota plan to hold a conference Monday that will feature a discussion on the future of nuclear power in both states.
The objective of the event being hosted in Hudson, Wis., is to draw attention to the need for Wisconsin to lift its 30-year moratorium on the construction of nuclear power plants so the state can utilize nuclear power as its primary alternative energy source, said Bob Seitz, spokesperson for Wisconsin Utility Investors, one of the sponsors of the event.
Seitz said the event will approach the nuclear issue from the industrial, state and federal sides of the issue. A panel including Wisconsin Assembly Committee on Energy and Utilities Chair James Soletski, D-Green Bay, and Terry Pickens, director of Nuclear Energy Policy at Minnesota-based Xcel Energy, will discuss the use of nuclear power in both states.
Seitz also said many of WUI’s 16,000 members have been lobbying at the Capitol to lift the ban and make nuclear power a reliable power source in Wisconsin, which he said wind and solar power cannot be.
“Wind and solar are nice options to supplement,” Seitz said. “But you can’t base your electric generation system on wind and solar because they are too intermittent.”
Wisconsin Sen. Robert Jauch, D-Poplar, a member of the Committee on Environment, said the concerns regarding nuclear power’s safety must be addressed before the construction of more nuclear plants in the state.
“I think we should be considering nuclear power as a clean energy option to fossil fuels only when we are confident that we are dealing with it in a safe manner and can dispose of byproducts properly,” Jauch said.
Seitz said despite criticism, he is still confident in the cleanliness of nuclear power. He said the amount of nuclear waste created by nuclear power is less than the waste from other power sources currently used in Wisconsin such as coal and natural gas.
Seitz added the conference will also highlight how far nuclear safety has progressed over the years.
Soletski, who worked in the nuclear power industry for 30 years, said he sees nuclear power as a consistent alternative to many problematic energy sources Wisconsin uses today.
“If we keep a balanced portfolio, then we won’t be held up. … For instance, (by) oil from overseas, shipment of frozen coal in really bad winters when the coal piles get frozen and we’re forced to curtail the burning of coal to make energy, or days on end when there’s no wind or no sun,” Soletski said.
Rep. Mike Huebsch, R-West Salem, a member of the Committee on Energy and Utilities, said he thinks politics are the main reason for the continuing presence of the nuclear moratorium.
“Politically there’s just not the will and certainly there’s a great deal of ignorance that I think opponents are capitalizing on with spent fuel and nuclear energy in general,” Huebsch said.
7 Comments | Leave a comment
Leave a comment
Herald Blogs
The Beat Goes On
Parrotheads gorge on Buffet’s ‘Buffet’
Muckrakers
End of the year ASM statement: Where is it?
Extra Points
Top Classified Ads (view all)
Place your classified ad online and have it show up here. Your ad will hit thousands of viewers a day!
DON'T READ ME! Too late. If you're reading this, guess how many other people are reading it. See... advertising in The Badger Herald does work!
IP hash: 0f68984d
Nah, just plan to shiver in the cold and dark - that’s better for the Earth.
IP hash: 3412785f
“Wisconsin Sen. Robert Jauch, D-Poplar, a member of the Committee on Environment, said the concerns regarding nuclear power’s safety must be addressed before the construction of more nuclear plants in the state.”
What concerns are those? Nuclear is one of the safest (if not the most safe) source of energy by ANY standard.
The only people with “concerns” are environmentalists and according to them no productive sources of energy are acceptable.
IP hash: 0f68984d
There is no rational alternatve to nuclear power.
Biofuels ‘worse than petrol’ for climate http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2009/10/23/2722259.htm?topic=
IP hash: 6399ad4d
Lift the moratorium. There is no (good) reason for having it. Let’s modernize the state, folks.
IP hash: 6ce96544
The Wisconsin legislature and the federal government have long recognized the serious safety issues that nuclear power and radioactive waste present—-who are you lunatics to say it’s safe? You hear one small tidbit of biased “information” and draw your conclusions without one iota of critical thought or research. Nuclear power plants have multiple barriers around them, armed guards, ten-mile evacuation zones, frequent drills to prepare for possible terrorist attacks, and a host of other safety precautions. What’s everyone so worried about if they’re so “safe”?
IP hash: 84626a49
There is the little matter of high level radioactive waste, which remains deadly for hundreds of thousands of years. After 50 years of producing the stuff, the industry still has not found a way to safely and permanently dispose of it. Current state law allows new nuclear plants as long as two conditons are met: (1) the Public Service Commission finds it makes sense economically and (2) there is a federal waste disposal site to handle the waste. That’s a perfectly sensible law, but instead of solving the waste problem the nuclear industry wants to change the rules.
IP hash: 6638bab4
Actually, there is a rational alternative to nuclear power: www.carbonfreenuclearfree.org. This technical study shows how the United States can be 100% renewable by 2050: renewables are cleaner, cheaper, safer and faster than nuclear. Let’s stop the acrimony and look at the facts. Nuclear energy is expensive and produces radioactive nuclear waste that lasts for hundreds of thousands of years. Wind is cheaper than nuclear, does not produce radioactive nuclear waste, and can be used as a baseload energy source when combined with compressed air storage. Don’t believe me? Do your homework: http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy07osti/40674.pdf