The outlook for nuclear power is bright on the world stage. Global demand for clean nuclear energy is higher than we have ever seen. The U.S. and 20 allied nations pledged to triple global nuclear energy capacity by 2050 at COP28, and a multinational survey reaffirmed last year — the world wants new nuclear.
In Washington, D.C., bipartisan support for nuclear energy has never been greater. Propelled by the House passing the ADVANCE Act 393-13 this month and momentum for passage in the Senate, Congress deserves some credit this year for working to help speed up the deployment of next-generation reactors, fueling hope for an American future powered by clean energy.
Wait until the watermelons down at the Split Wood, Not Atoms hear about this.
ReplyDeleteAll this spending is getting us no where. I have worked in this industry for over 40 years and all this money is going to policy analysts, beltway bandits, and subsidizing more engineering work and studies in the form of 'white collar welfare.' The economic risk is too high to build in the U.S. This is driven by many layers of regulatory uncertainty, loss of real project management skills, and multiple layers of trickle down extended delays and increased costs. All these new laws and studies just result in new regulations to save time that will apply to new projects - adding to the burden, never relieving any. Individual federal regulators drive costs up by 10s of millions of dollars, often due to their own ignorance. All levels of regulatory agencies demand their piece of the pie by asking silly questions (projects are required to pay for their own regulatory oversite so the more questions asked; the more regulatory jobs, the higher the costs go.) In regulatory space the only way to get in trouble is to do something so they delay and ask more questions rather than resolving perceived issues. Project management in the biggest named companies has devolved to spreadsheet lists of things to do. Gone are the days when people who understood the engineering, the crafts, and the supply chain ran projects. Policies and technical decisions are based on the 'Popular Mechanics' level of understanding. These are the most complex machines our civilization ever built and we no longer have the will, the culture, or the wherewithal to build them. It has been depressing for decades, and even with all the advanced, small, recent large reactor hype, we are not going anywhere until the problems are addressed.
ReplyDelete(Former SRO, PE Nuke, still working inside.)
"Gone are the days when people who understood the engineering, the crafts, and the supply chain ran projects"
DeleteI am a degreed B.S.N.E. from Penn State, former nuclear project manager for a major midatlantic utility, and also formerly qualified on D2G and A4W. I left the industry decades ago and am glad I did.
They keep calling it clean energy. Don't we still have the spent fuel rod problem?
ReplyDeleteThe new smaller units use those same "spent" fuel rods to power the station, as I understand. Is this the tech we are following behind?
DeleteJpaul
They never mention all the rad waste generated making fuel rods / bombs. There is no safe level of ionizing particles (rads) just a probability cloud of how likely a lethal mutation will result or cellular death/damage.
ReplyDeleteOnly two words and one truism summarize fission based nuclear power: Fukushima, Chernobyl and human error.