SRS key in new energy proposal 5/7/2009 12:39 AM By MIKE GELLATLY Staff writer
Congressman Joe Wilson is proposing a new energy bill he believes balances energy needs and environmental concerns, without compromising either.
Drilling for oil off the coast of South Carolina and others states, building a nuclear reprocessing center and commercial reactors at the Savannah River Site and coal furnaces are all part of Wilson's proposal for "American Conservation and Clean Energy."
Wilson unveiled a bill this week that the Congressman believes will take great strides toward the future of clean energy. A bill that has support from both sides of the isle and would be a boon for the Savannah River Site and the Congressman's state.
The bill focuses on drilling 20 miles off the coast of several states in the pursuit of local oil and natural gas. With drilling he hopes the profits from offshore leasing would be distributed with the lion share being split between the producing states,
new energy research, deploying clean coal technologies, environmental restoration, the treasury and a fund to "be used to assist in reprocessing and recycling spent (nuclear) fuel."
Wilson's "American Conservation and Clean Energy Independence Act" outlines a 20-mile minimum for any permanent drilling structure off of the American coastline.
"I am very concerned with the hospitality industry in South Carolina," Wilson said.
The 20-mile permanent structure limits and 10-mile surface occupancy limits, Wilson said, are based on facts that these limits would mean the rigs would be invisible from even the tallest buildings in Charleston.
As alternatives to carbon-producing energy sites, Wilson hopes to "encourage America's commercial nuclear renaissance," saying Wednesday he saw South Carolina as a centerpiece to this.
New, commercial reactors producing energy for surrounding states, Wilson said, would also help to fuel research.
Wilson believes with new technology research, at the Savannah River National Laboratory could be vital.
"I believe it should happen, I want to promote it," said the Congressman who represents the eastern half of Aiken County. "I am very partial (and want) any advances to be located at SRS."
In addition to advancing an energy network that moves away from oil imports, the act looks to transportation.
"Exploration of new domestic oil and natural gas is important, however, investments must be made to diversify America's transportation system to reduce the overall use of oil in the future economy," the bill reads. "This legislation will greatly expand the use of low carbon electricity production and enhance America's security by promoting fuel diversity, spurring the use of electric hybrids in transportation."
Further research on plug-in stations, battery efficiency and syncing the U.S. system to the rest of the world, are also mentioned in the bill.
The bill, H.R. 2227 was introduced to the house May 4 and has been sent to committee.
Contact Mike Gellatly at mgellatly@aikenstandard.com.
Notice about comments:
AikenStandard.com is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. AikenStandard.com does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not AikenStandard.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website.
Comment Title: Blow to reprocessing - good news!
Good news on the reprocessing front & good news for the Aiken/Augusta area -- the Environmental Impact Statement being prepared on reprocessing (Global Nuclear Energy Partnership) is to be officially halted by DOE (on June 29). The over-reach to build a reprocessing plant at SRS has been stopped. The effort by narrow special interests to dump spent fuel at SRS for reprocessing and stiff the tax payers with the huge costs of that has hit the wall. We in South Carolina don't want anymore nuclear waste dumped at SRS so this decision is celebrated!
Posted by: Wolverine On: 5/12/2009
Comment Title: Nuclear Reprocessing Facilities
All of the Comment Posters display the typical response to any large scale problem: "Not In My Back Yard". But noone comes up with any viable alternative. The term "Spent Nuclear Fuel" is really a misnomer. It still contains large amounts of usable energy but not in its present form and state. There are 104 nuclear powered electric generating plants in the US. Each facility has been storing "spent" fuel rods since the inception of this technology. And the inventory is growing year by year. How long do we continue to store this material on-site?? And what do we do with this material when the reactor is decommissioned?? Shall we continue to store it at the same site?? Some have suggested that we haul it all to Nevada and store it permanently at Yucca Mountain (which is not really a mountain - it is a volcanically created ridge line). By the way, Yucca Mtn is part of the Nevada Test Site, located about 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas. The NTS occupies approx 1300 square miles (about the size of Rhode Island). The people of Nevada do not want this material brought into their state for burial. By the way, there are no nuclear power reactors anywhere in the state of Nevada. But the Nevadans might be willing to participate in a multi-state recycling program at the NTS where the re-processed nuclear material would be used to fuel clusters of next-generation power reactors that would go a long way towards weening us off fossil fuel plants with their resulting carbon dioxide emissions. This nationwide situation we are all in, calls for a national solution. And the solution I propose calls for a rather straight forward, yet intense engineering and scientic effort. The good thing about the Nevada Test Site being involved in this solution is that it encompasses a large geographic area, it has already been involved in nuclear matters, it has some of the technical and scientic resources already in place, it has Department of Energy and State oversight, and it has a large, well-trained security force in place. There are several facilties in the country similar to the NTS. Savannah River just happens to be one of them. Some of the others are at Hanaford, WA and the National Engineering Lab in Idaho. There are also large, underused military bases that could be brought into this program. I'm not suggesting I have all the answers. BUT I would like to generate some serious discussion and exchange of well thought out ideas. That would be a lot more fruitful than the same old NIMBY Syndrone.
Posted by: On: 5/9/2009
Comment Title: BETTER YET
Better yet let's dump all of it in Bush's and Cheney's ranches wrapped in a BIG bow.
Posted by: On: 5/8/2009
Comment Title: Not near populated areas?
Uhh, I guess you just write off Aiken, Augusta, N. Augusta, Orangeburg and Columbia, all major populated areas w/in 50 mile radius that would be contaminated in the event of an accident. Lets just move it all to west Texas, now there's an "unpopulated area".
Posted by: Reindeargirl On: 5/8/2009
Comment Title: Don't Dump it in Dixie
Haven't we been dumped on enough? Why should WE become Yucca Mountain? Reprocessing doesn't get RID OF ANYTHING - it just spreads it around like a lump of jelly on toast. Bringing spent fuel doesn't negate the terrorist risk at reactors where the spent fuel pool would be the target . YOu can't get rid of those, Wolverine! This is a STUPID idea. Hardened On Site Storage is a cheaper, safer, cleaner way to deal with spent fuel. And keeps South Carolina from becong the NUCLEAR DUMP OF THE NATION/
Posted by: Cobra On: 5/8/2009
Comment Title: strike back against dumpers
Wolverine - I don't think folks here will take too kindly to being a spent fuel and reprocessing dump. Why is the option of dumping on South Carolina locked in some people's minds. Some make the money & other sget dumped on, I suppose. Time to break this mentality and strike back against nuke dumpers. The Cobra is ready!
Posted by: Wolverine On: 5/7/2009
Comment Title: Reprocessing Spent Nuclear Fuel
The current plan (almost dead) is to bury our spent nuclear fuel (from 100+ commercial electric generating stations) in Yucca Mountain at the Nevada Test Site. I'm quite familiar with the Site and it is unlikely that it will ever by used for spent fuel burial, nor should it be (for sound technical reasons). Then what shall we do with the 70+ thousand tons of spent nuclear fuel currently being stored at our nuclear power plants?? Regardless of your philosophy about nucear power (for or against), the storage problem is very real and it must be dealt with. Maintaining this huge volume of highly radioactive material represents a clear and present danger. We don't have to worry about terrorists importing nuclear materials into the US to make a "dirty bomb". All they have to do is tap into the nuclear material already here in storage all over the country. A well trained and well armed group of terrorists (foreign or domestic) could probably overpower the security force at most of our commercial nuclear facilities, especially if they were not concerned about their own well being, i.e., suicidal. And they would not have to steel the spent nuclear fuel stored primarily in pools. All they would have to do is bring enough exsplosives with them and the resulting detonation would spew radioactivity over a very wide geographic area. Note that the containment building housing the nuclear reactor itself would not even have to come into play. My proposal is to set up reprocessing facilities at our existing government sites, such as Savannah River, Nevada Test Site, Hanaford Nuclear Facility, Idaho National Test Station, and other relatively large military bases. Clusters of reactors could be built at these reprocessing facilities which would produce huge amount of electricity to feed into the national grid. By using our existing government owned facilities, we take advantage of their existing infrastructure, including well trained and experienced security forces. And these sites occupy large geographic areas which for the most part are not within or near highly populated areas. This proposal would also expand upon the existing technological base of nuclear reprocessing. Technical universities and the technical community in general within the areas of these facilties would see substantial growth and advancement. Furthermore, we would be spreading the solution to an existing serious problem throughout the country rather than dumping the problem in one area for someone else to deal with years later.
Posted by: On: 5/7/2009
Comment Title: Joe you are a genius, NOT!!!
Come on Joe, what happened to "DRILL BABY DRILL". The republicans can't come up with any new and creative ideas! This is the problem with South Carolina it's the "guys we elect to represent us in Columbia and Washington.
Posted by: Biting Possum On: 5/7/2009
Comment Title: Backwards Joe
Joe Wilson's support for "advances" at SRS, such as the reprocessing of radioactive spent fuel, mean that the rest of us will be dumped on and we will pay and pay and pay. Given that reprocessing would cost billions and result in a radioactive mess in South Carolina seems not to concern Rep. Wilson as his biddies will profit. Joe, you're going to have a fightin' rebel alligator on your hands if you move forward with your plans to once again dump on us.
9