Posted on 02/15/2021 8:58:27 PM PST by SeekAndFind
As the United States faces several key challenges simultaneously - COVID-19, the economic crisis, social injustice and the rising threat of climate change - the federal government is looking for solutions that help address multiple issues at once. Recent commitments by President Biden are encouraging: by tying the post-pandemic economic recovery to investments in clean energy, we can tackle all four existential crises at the same time.
During his campaign, Biden ran on a sweeping clean energy plan, pledging to achieve a carbon-free electricity sector by 2035 with net zero emissions economy-wide by 2050 as part of his "all of government" plan for climate. The president's proposed tech-neutral approach opens the door for an inclusive plan to combat climate change, which includes nuclear power - the nation's largest carbon-free source of energy. This marks the first time nuclear power has been part of the Democratic platform since 1972.
Additionally, we have seen increasing bipartisan congressional support for nuclear energy over the last decade. The new administration can build on this strong foundation by accelerating its investment in advanced nuclear energy to create new opportunities in clean power sector and take meaningful steps towards cost-effective decarbonization. The nuclear industry can be ready to accomplish this with advanced technologies and a commitment to align with the equity-centered approach of the new administration.
The Department of Energy (DOE) leaves the new administration well-positioned to deliver on Biden administration's appropriately ambitious decarbonization goals by continuing to invest in the bright future of nuclear energy. DOE recently launched the National Reactor Innovation Center (NRIC) to support demonstrations of advanced reactors and pioneer best practices for community engagement with new nuclear technology. That's because DOE has already recognized the promise of advanced reactors, acknowledging they can help lower carbon emissions and create new clean energy jobs.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
The ambitious timelines for the DOE's projects mean advanced nuclear energy can play a meaningful role in enabling communities to reach their climate goals, potentially directly replacing fossil plants and partnering with renewable energy and battery technologies. In the long-run, the investment in advanced nuclear technologies will also help provide local, high-paying jobs for the communities where they will operate as well as jobs in the emerging supply chains. And for communities facing coal plant closures - like in Michigan, Ohio, Nevada and North Carolina - advanced nuclear will be the most effective option to provide always-on, carbon-free energy to replace the baseload of fossil fuels, something that wind and solar power are not able to do quite yet.
The authors of the article are delusional when they say "...This is progress the Biden administration can build on by continuing to invest in the next generation of nuclear energy..."
As if that were even a possibility.
If it hadn't been for the liberal hissy fits back then, we would be enjoying almost 100% clean, safe nuclear energy right now. Instead jackasses have been closing nuclear power plants in places like New York and Vermont and California and other ultra-liberal states.
We are sitting on trillions of cubic feet of natual gas, and these morons are talking about nuclear?
The Left even mismanaged or more like sabotaged even the nuclear waste issue by closing the site in Nevada. They shouldn’t even run a popsicle stand.
A conservative state should get on board and approve a nuclear plant.
Nuclear is an option we SHOULD be pursuing. We should be pursuing ALL energy options. Renewable energy is BS, as we are finding out with a cold snap in an energy rich state such as Texas.
Natural gas is something we should be aggressively exploiting as well.
Energy costs affect the cost of everything. Well designed modern nuclear power is a stabilizing force against the vagaries of oil and gas exploration and exploitation.
RE: We are sitting on trillions of cubic feet of natural gas, and these morons are talking about nuclear?
It’s not an either/or thing but a Both/And thing.
We already *ARE* using nuclear energy *AND* natural gas. So, why not continue to develop both and improve the technology?
DOE is investing way too much money in light water smr’s. Those things will be obsolete and impossible to sell —whenever they are ready for the public.
The way to is the 4th generation SMR’s that employ some variation of the lftr technology.
The last nuclear plant in this country was designed and construction was begun in 1977, taking nearly 20 years to come online and begin producing power.
Only a few years after personal computers took off.
Think of the Space Shuttle, and think of SpaceX. That much difference in technology.
We should be pursuing small, modular pebble bed reactors scalable to run a municipal power plant for a small city, and modular Thorium reactors. It is crazy that we are not doing so.
We should be developing these and exporting the technology...we should be a world leader in this.
Trust me-if we don’t...the Chinese will.
America is vastly self sufficient in numerous energy sources but government and liberals will rather see people suffer. They are sick.
Agreed. My wife is complaining about the cost of everything going up, particularly groceries. It costs energy to grow, process, and transport food. When an administration comes in and signals it is going to kill cheap energy to force people to adopt renewable horse crap, the market begins to raise the price of energy.
Trump understood energy costs quite well and the effect is has on an economy, and it showed in the results. What the Left is doing right now is an economy killer.
Worse, they know it. They WANT energy costs to go up.
There are a lot of far better options than the reactors built in the Sixties and Seventies, that is for certain.
Yes, it is.
I am all for nuclear energy but there is no climate crisis.
Unless we get hit by a comet or a large asteroid and then we’ll have one spectacular climate crisis. With no money left to help survive it.
Would Susan Rice and Valerie Jarrett support anything that is good for America?
agreed
We’ve only been using nuclear power to power our ships and submarines since 1954 (hubs was in Navy for 6 yrs and served on the first USS Hyman G Rickover, that sub has since been decommissioned and they’re building a second USS Rickover now) so I never really got the fits against nuclear power.
Carbon carbon carbon. Why would anyone dislike carbon? Plant food, an element worth its weight especially to plants.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.