[Ccpg] nukes get your money?

[seedmind at usa.net]

Senate OKs Billions for Nuclear Power 

By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer 

WASHINGTON - The Senate endorsed a plan Tuesday for the government to 
provide loan guarantees for construction of a half dozen nuclear power 
plants that supporters say are necessary for the industry's survival. 

Critics called the government assistance a giveaway to a mature industry 
that should be left to succeed or fail on its own. But their attempt to 
strip the measure from a broad energy bill fell short, 50-48. 

Sen. Pete Domenici (news, bio, voting record), R-N.M., the architect of 
the package of subsidies for the nuclear industry, said the government 
assistance will jump-start nuclear power. There has not been a new 
nuclear plant licensed since the 1979 accident at the Three Mile Island 
reactor in Pennsylvania. 


"The time has come to quit playing around with energy and say, wherever 
we can, we are going to produce more energy," argued Domenici. Nuclear 
power has long been neglected, he said, and that has been "a giant 
mistake." 


Opponents questioned why nuclear power should be singled out for such 
largess, which they said could cost taxpayers $14 billion to $16 billion 
should the future power reactors fail and be abandoned. 


It's "not a question about whether someone is pro-nuclear or 
anti-nuclear," argued Sen. Ron Wyden (news, bio, voting record), D-Ore., 
one of the provision's sharpest critics, but whether "to put at risk the 
taxpayers of this country" if the reactor projects flop. 


Sen. John Sununu, R-N.H., co-sponsor with Wyden of the effort to scuttle 
the loan guarantees, said he supports a broad array of energy sources, 
including nuclear, but "power plants should be developed on a level 
playing field without government subsidizing one industry over another." 


He said he also opposes a $2 billion subsidy to develop clean coal 
plants, also in the energy legislation that Domenici hopes to get through 
the Senate in the coming weeks. An energy bill already passed by the 
House contains far less help for the nuclear industry and does little to 
spur new reactor construction. 


In the most ambitious attempt to spur nuclear power development in 
decades, Domenici put into the Senate bill measures that would: 


_Have the government provide loan guarantees to cover half the cost of 
building enough new reactors to produce 8,400 megawatts of power. That 
would probably be as many as six or seven next-generation reactors. 


_Build a $1.1 billion reactor in Idaho to produce hydrogen. 


_Authorize $865 million to speed research into ways to alter reactor 
waste chemically to reduce its volume and long-term radioactivity. 


_Increase other nuclear research spending by tens of millions of dollars 
over current levels. 


Supporters of the measure argued that the energy bill provides loan 
guarantees to other energy sources, including a proposal in the bill that 
would underwrite loans covering as much as $18 billion of a $20 billion 
Alaska pipeline to bring natural gas down from the North Slope. 


In case of the nuclear reactors, taxpayers wouldn't pay a dime if the 
plants should succeed but would be liable for billions of dollars should 
they fail. 


Wyden cited an analysis from the Congressional Budget Office (news - web 
sites) that estimated the new plants probably will cost $2.1 billion to 
$3 billion apiece with "the risk of default on such a loan guarantee to 
be very high — well above 50 percent." 


Nuclear industry representatives called the CBO analysis flawed and said 
that companies wouldn't pursue reactor projects unless there was almost 
certain likelihood of success because they would be on the hook for half 
of the cost if there is a default. 

The new plants would be built under regulations that removed many of the 
past licensing hurdles and would be far cheaper than that last reactors 
built. 

"We're trying to jump-start the industry again," says Richard Myers of 
the Nuclear Energy Institute, the industry trade group. "We're not 
looking for a handout. We're not looking for any freebies." 

___ 

The bill is S.14.