Mediaboss Marketing

Republicans and many Democrats have high hopes for small nuclear reactors as an answer to climate change, but the nascent technology faces daunting regulatory and economic obstacles.

"I am not optimistic that any kind of nuclear reactors will have any significant impact on climate change for the next 20 or 30 years," said Allison Macfarlane, a former chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission who is now a professor at George Washington University. "It's really hard to make the economics of nuclear power work."

The Trump administration is betting on nuclear, even as it opposes most government-led initiatives to curb climate change. It is investing money into the research and development of new reactors and fuels, promoting faster permitting approvals, and even signing up to buy power from NuScale, the company racing to be the first to operate a small modular nuclear reactor.

"I am very optimistic this can be a low-carbon tool moving forward," Rita Baranwal, the Energy Department's assistant secretary of energy for nuclear energy, told the Washington Examiner in an interview. "It is essential to any country or community looking to minimize their carbon footprint."

While many environmentalists have been skeptical of nuclear energy on safety and cost grounds, some Democrats embrace nuclear energy, which provides most of America's zero-carbon power.

Presidential candidates Joe Biden and Andrew Yang are running on investment in small modular nuclear reactors. Bernie Sanders, by contrast, has said he would look to shut down existing nuclear plants, along with stopping new ones.

"Bernie Sanders is the only candidate who doesn't seem to have updated his positions to reflect the realities of climate change," said Josh Freed, who runs the clean energy program at the center-left think tank Third Way. "What we are seeing is the equivalent of updating nuclear for the era of iPhones."

The United States can't reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by midcentury without advancements in nuclear energy, energy analysts say, since wind and solar cannot deliver 24-hour electricity.

"There is no chance of meeting a net-zero goal without everybody on deck, including advanced nuclear," Ernst Moniz, who was energy secretary during the Obama administration, said at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Energy Innovation Summit last year.

In the early 2010s, the Obama administration aimed to facilitate the construction of as many as 50 small modular reactors a year by 2040 or sooner.

The 1979 accident at the Three Mile Island nuclear plant in Pennsylvania, along with the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, had turned public sentiment against the large nuclear plants first built in the 1950s. Only one new reactor has been completed in the last three decades in the U.S., with recent projects canceled or delayed because of mounting expenses.

But a growing awareness of climate change, and a decline of the existing nuclear fleet due to competition from natural gas and renewables, sparked a wave of newer, less established companies to conceive of creating smaller reactors that would be easier and cheaper to build, safer to run, and more flexible to use.

Obama energy secretary Steven Chu announced a partnership with Babcock & Wilcox in 2012 to split costs on a small modular reactor, saying that the reactors would be operating by 2022.

That vision has not proceeded as planned. Babcock & Wilcox later withdrew its application due to high costs.

"That's when I became a little more skeptical. What's wrong? This is not working," Macfarlane said.

NuScale, one of the original new companies to crop up, is still standing.

The Energy Department has invested more than $300 million into the Oregon-based technology firm since 2014. Chief Strategy Officer Chris Colbert said NuScale's survival shows the government's investment has been worth it.

It is hoping by 2020 to be the first company to obtain a license to operate a small reactor in the U.S. and expects to have its reactors in commercial use by 2026.

"Every year, it's been a challenge of making the case that the money being allocated to us is being wisely spent," Colbert told the Washington Examiner. "We have demonstrated through our success in the NRC licensing process that it's been a wise investment."

NuScale has lined up its first customer, Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems, a group of utilities in six Western states that are purchasing power from 12 individual 60-megawatt reactors being built at the Energy Department's Idaho National Laboratory. The Energy Department plans to buy power from two of the reactors.

NuScale is further ahead in the permitting process than other companies because it is designing light-water reactors, the most common type used in traditional plants, meaning regulators are accustomed to it.

Its smaller, 75-foot-tall reactors are about one-third the size of traditional reactors. They sit in huge underground pools of water, using it as a coolant. About 12 of them can be installed at one site.

Other types of advanced reactors have faced setbacks. Megabillionaire Bill Gates, who co-founded the nuclear technology firm TerraPower, recently warned that the obstacles are "daunting."

TerraPower, which employs a traveling-wave reactor that uses depleted uranium as fuel, had to scrap its first demonstration project in China because of the Trump administration's trade policies.

Even if NuScale's reactors begin operating on schedule, some nuclear experts doubt they would be widely adopted.

While the smaller reactors have lower capital costs, they produce less electricity than a traditional reactor, meaning they don't enjoy the same economy of scale.

New nuclear reactors could have a hard time competing in power markets with cheap gas and renewables, a disadvantage that could be counteracted if the federal government penalized carbon pollution, which would make emissions-free nuclear power relatively more attractive.

"The most important thing for advanced nuclear as for any other zero-carbon technology is to have a set of policies that acknowledge climate change and help drive demand," said Freed.

Colbert of Nuscale countered that the company could compete in states that require utilities to procure power from lower-carbon sources (more than half of states do). NuScale has also signed agreements with Canada, Romania, Jordan, and other countries that are considering deploying the company's small nuclear reactors once they are proven in the U.S.

"We don't expect to sell small modular actors in every single market," Colbert said. "To be successful, we don't have to."

Some climate hawks argue the money invested in nuclear energy would be better spent expanding renewable energy sources, which they say can replace nuclear power.

"There is an argument of lost opportunities," said Matthew McKinzie, the director of the nuclear program at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Supporters, however, note that companies are exploring different types of small reactors to spread out the risk and increase the chance of success.

The Energy Department, with the backing of Congress, is supporting the development of nonwater advanced reactors, such as liquid metal-cooled fast reactors, that would use sodium or lead as a coolant instead of water, operating at a higher temperature and enabling them to provide power in other applications, such as heating for industrial purposes.

Congress's 2019 end-of-year spending bill included $300 million to create a first-ever advanced nuclear reactor demonstration program to spur cost-sharing projects with private companies.

There are currently 25 different advanced reactors proposed by U.S.-based companies in various stages of development, according to the Energy Department.

The agency is also helping to develop different types of fuels to power advanced reactors to address a shortage of domestic supply.

And the Trump administration, at the direction of Congress, has directed the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to streamline approvals for small reactors. Nuclear takes longer to permit than other technologies, such as wind and solar, because of the safety risk.

"Nuclear takes a long time to permit," Macfarlane said. "It's complicated, and you don't want to get it wrong."

Some critics fear the push to speed safety reviews could come back to bite the nuclear industry, which is still struggling to enhance its public image.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is considering a proposal by companies such as NuScale that would allow them to reduce the size of the emergency planning zone around a plant, given the fact that smaller reactor cores produce less radioactive material that could be released in an accident.

"That is premature at best," said Edwin Lyman, director of nuclear power safety at the Union of Concerned Scientists. "These reactors are still on paper. You need to build a few, test, and demonstrate them before having confidence they will be safe. Being too overconfident in the systems you have is the kind of complacency that brought the world Fukushima."

See the rest here:
The climate proposal supported by many Republicans and Democrats is an iffy bet - Washington Examiner

The recent impeachment hearings were like a debate over whether the earth is flat, the Democrats arguing that the earth is round and the Republicans arguing that the earth is flat.

The evidence is overwhelming that the earth is, in fact, round. The White House would assert that satellite photos which verify that the earth is round are classified information.

The Republicans did have some pretty articulate lawyers and politicians on their side. Unfortunately, they may have confused many voters enough to actually believe what they were saying.

Hopefully, voters will eventually realize, that no matter how much Republicans scream and distort, the world is not flat.

Will voters be persuaded by the theater and the distortions of the Republicans? For the sake of our democracy, I sincerely hope not.

The U.S. Senate must now conduct a fair and nonpartisan trial, with witnesses such as John Bolton and Lev Parnas.

Mark Rothacher, Salt Lake City

Read more:
Letter: Republicans argue that the earth is flat - Salt Lake Tribune

ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDSGetty Images

WASHINGTONMy new old friend, Senator Joni Ernst, Republican of Iowa, was bouncing with delight. Considering that the latest Morning Consult poll has her five points underwater back home, this showed a remarkable joie de vivre, which made her sarcasm positively effervescent. She spoke in fluent Italics. I am excited that all of these members are going to be supporting the United States military as we bring up military spending, she said. Whether thats the new Space Force, whether thats autonomous vehicles, AI, hypersonics, all of those things we need to push back against Russia, and I am glad to know theyve publicly stated it. Apparently, proving that the president* blackjacked Ukraine by withholding military aid makes you obligated to fund every wild hair that grows upon the Pentagon procurement people.

(Ernst also was passing notes around noting how many of the House managers had missed various military funding votes in the past year. Unfortunately for her, one of the votes Jerrold Nadler missed because his wife was ill.)

Ernst had gathered with several of her colleagues during Thursday nights dinner break in the impeachment trial of the President* of the United States. Joining her were John Barrasso of Wyoming, James Lankford of Oklahoma, and Tim Scott of South Carolina. Ernst, Lankford, and Scott all had been rumored to be possible votes in favor of calling witnesses when and if that comes to a vote sometime next week. But on Thursday night, with the president*s lawyer, Jay Sekulow, and White House spokesman Hogan Gidley chatting about eight feet away, all of them spoke like good McConnellite functionaries.

We want to get the whole story, Lankford said. I was trying to take notes today on how many half-truths we were hearingthat they were telling part of the story, but not the other part. Or they would talk about the phone call, but conveniently leave the sentence out before or the sentence out afterwards.

ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDSGetty Images

Weve heard the same story, over and over again, for two days, Scott added. Theres an old saying that, if you say it often enough, it must be true. The good news is that the Democrats have literally bought into that premise that if you say it often enough, its true. Weve heard the same storyrinse it, recite it, repeat it. And what is that story? That the President of the United States has no authority whatsoever to look for injustice or corruption anywhere, even in the 2016 election. And it is a sad day for our nation that the House managers are telling the same story, over and over again, with no basis in fact. My frustration is that the American people are only getting half the story.

All week there were little signs that little things were going sideways. First, Mitch McConnell actually changed his original rules for how the trial would be managed. Then, on Wednesday, Robert Ray, one of the two former Whitewater special prosecutors on the White House defense team, went on Fox News and conspicuously declined to compliment lead attorneys Pat Cipollone and Sekulow.

But all of the big stuffincluding every vote taken so farhas gone straight down party lines. The idea that four Republicans will vote to hear witnesses seems as remote as ever, and the notion that 14 of these Ernsts, Scotts, and Lankfords actually would vote to convict the president* and remove him from office remains utterly preposterous. The whole party in Congress doesnt seem to be thinking past tomorrows lunch menu, and even these young stars dont seem able to reckon with what their futures might be, or with the prospect the marks on their political souls might be permanent.

Respond to this post on the Esquire Politics Facebook page here.

Read more from the original source:
No Republican in Congress Is Thinking Past Tomorrow's Lunch Menu - Esquire

Shell be joined by Cruz and Rubio, who are special targets of my disappointment because they were once special targets of Trumps ugliness. They know it firsthand and well.

They campaigned against him for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016, when he didnt just criticize them but viciously belittled and even savaged them. He conspiracy-theorized a role for Cruzs father in John F. Kennedys assassination.

A pathological liar, Cruz called Trump.

But now that Trump is president and his base has become the most impassioned constituency in the party, Cruz is his biggest cheerleader and a ready mouthpiece for all of those lies. He has swapped thoughts of 2016 for thoughts of 2024, when theres another opportunity to reach for the White House and Trumps loyalists will come in handy. Hell have to muscle aside Javanka and Don Jr., but thats a pickle for another day. First step: acquittal!

Rubio has long fashioned himself a foreign-policy maven and took a hard line when it came to Russia. So you might think that the Trump presidency would be especially galling to him. You might also think that Trumps bullying of Ukraine which left the country more vulnerable to Russian aggression would be some sort of breaking point.

But hes a Republican member of Congress in 2020, which means hes a sycophantic shell of his former self. And having bitten his tongue about Trumps global misadventures, hell now abet more of the same by helping Trump stay in office.

There are so many other Republican senators to marvel at. Mitt Romney, what was the point of diving back into public life if youre going to prop up a president whose fraudulence you once gave a whole long speech about? Lamar Alexander, you venerated Howard Baker, a fellow Tennessean who once held your Senate seat and put principle above partisanship by standing up to President Nixon. Why not do the same and stand up to President Trump?

Susan Collins, I cant imagine the exhaustion of your role as political wild card, scrutinized to a fare-thee-well. But come on. If youre going to pride yourself on autonomy, you need to exercise it when it matters most.

Its not fun to be any of you right now, with McConnell above you and #MAGA hellions below you poised to make your life a misery if you stray. But no one forced you into public service. When you entered the Senate, you took an oath, and you took another one on Thursday. I have a third question, maybe just a rewording of the first and second: Doesnt that nag at you even a little?

I invite you to sign up for my free weekly email newsletter. You can follow me on Twitter (@FrankBruni).

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. Wed like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And heres our email: letters@nytimes.com.

The rest is here:
Senate Republicans Are Bathed in Shame - The New York Times

WASHINGTONThe biggest news about this corrupt administration* was not made in the Senate chamber on Tuesday. It was made out on the campaign trail by Senator Professor Warren. From CNBC:

Make no mistake. If we ever are going to repair the damage done by this administration*, it is going to have to include a thorough fumigation of every corner of the national executive. The first big mistake made by President Barack Obama was his determination to look forward, and not back. Too many of the criminals working for the last worst president in history skated. Too many Wall Street vandals got away clean. That cannot be allowed to happen again. The corruption of this administration* is unprecedented. It demands this kind of unprecedented response.

And we might as well look to the future, because the present is too dismal to contemplate. In the Senate on Tuesday, the Republican Party, represented by its majority caucus, formalized its fealty to this renegade administration*. It had several chances to demonstrate a modicum of independence, a smidgen of human courage, and it failed every time. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer proposed amendments to add further documents and witnesses to the deliberations. All of them failed by a straight, party-line 53-47 margin.

Alex WongGetty Images

In this, no Republican was different from any other Republican. Lisa Murkowski and Tom Cotton were the same. Thom Tillis and Ted Cruz were the same. Cory Gardner and Jim Inhofe were the same. Mitt Romney and Ben Sasse were the same as Mike Rounds and Mike Enzi. And they were all the same as Mitch McConnell. There were no moderate Republicans in the Senate on Tuesday. There were no Never Trumpers. There were only collaborators. There was no independence in the Senate on Tuesday, only complicity. And it was a deadening, sad thing to watch. The only real reaction was another cup of soggy oatmeal from the increasingly useless Susan Collins.

First of all, I dont believe a word of that. I think that three weeks from now, or whenever, shell find a way to weasel out and, even if she doesnt, I dont think there are three other Republicans who would follow her to a free buffet, let alone to a vote that would inconvenience the White House. Every single Republican in the chamber on Tuesday looked like theyd rather be anywhere else, up to and including hanging by their thumbs from the Key Bridge.

I like to look around and see how many of my colleagues are looking guilty, said Senator Amy Klobuchar. I saw a lot of them just sitting there, looking down. The Democratic senators seem content to plug along, letting the majority keep voting down what would seem to anyone whos ever watched a police procedural on TV to be reasonable requests. All this talk about how theyre asking the Senate to do the Houses work, thats just BS, said Senator Mazie Horono. Im listening very carefully, I take notes, and then I make my comments parenthetically, like, 'What a bunch of...

House manager Hakeem Jeffries later made a fine presentation of how many witnesses testified in previous impeachments. (Andrew Johnsons trial had 40 of them.) Thats the kind of thing that will survive on the record after all the knee-jerk constitutional negligence has been toted up. Barack Obama was wrong in 2008 and Joe Biden is wrong today. The fever never will break. The patient is going to have to die.

Link:
There Were No 'Moderate Republicans' in the Senate on Tuesday. Only Collaborators. - Esquire