House energy bill has $1.3B for nuclear reactor in Idaho

AP via Salt Lake Tribune ^ | 4/23/2005 | AP Staff

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

BOISE - The energy-policy bill just approved by the U.S. House includes $1.3 billion to develop a new generation of nuclear reactor at the Idaho National Laboratory, resurrecting a project that advocates say will define the future of nuclear power.

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

This is good news!

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

Nuclear ping!!

[NEBUCHADNEZZAR1961]

misleading title. Developing a new reactor isnt' the same as building a new reactor. Reactors cost way more than $1.3 Billion my friend.

[Williams]

"The proposal faces an uncertain future in the Senate, and has come under fire from environmental groups."

It's become obvious the senate is a huge problem.

[hinckley buzzard]

proposal faces an uncertain future in the Senate, and has come under fire from environmental groups."

Predictable, but no doubt with the robust leadership and support of the resolute Sen Frist and GOP colleagues, success is assured. /sarc

[stylin_geek]

You have doubts about Limp Frist?

[hinckley buzzard]

You have doubts about Limp Frist?

LOL. Nope. I'd say any doubts have pretty well been resolved by events.

[ken5050]

Since you have knowledge of this nuclear stuff, I'm going to clib waaay out own my limb here and ask what is probably a very stupid question, for which I shall be hounded and castigated...however, here goes....<P.
I understand the basic concept of long range electrical grid transmissions..how power is stepped up via transformers, and then stepped back down...<P.
So, if we're going to finally build the Yucca Mt nuclear waste storage factility...shy don't we built a huge compllex of nuclear reactors next to it to generate power....and send it all over the country via high voltage transmission lines..It's far better to have all the reactors in one safe place...you guard them along with the waste site..and you don't have the "problem" of transporting the waste long distances in the future..The government could lease building rights for the reactors to the different power companies.

[stylin_geek]

Limp Frist is not original with me, I saw it posted on Polipundit, and thought I'd introduce it to the FR lexicon.

Yeah on events and actions with Limp Frist.

Any way we can sic Tom DeLay on the spineless wimps in the Senate?

[Jambe]

I'll toss in my $.02 worth -

1) There are practical limits as to how far electricity can be transmitted via High Voltage lines due to line losses.

2) It would probably be just as difficult to build the transmission lines due to NIMBY as it would to build reactors in specific geographic areas.

3) Power plants require water for cooling - Yucca lacks water.

4) Distributed power distribution is probably more practical from a reliability standpoint.

[Zeroisanumber]

Right on!

[NewEnglander]

Do not forget. The US is still building nuclear reactors. All new US Navy submarines and big aircraft carriers are all powered by a least one nuclear reactor.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Plans to construct an advanced nuclear reactor - one that would generate hydrogen as well as electricity - at the DOE site in eastern Idaho were part of a Senate energy bill that died in 2003.

Wonder how they do that?

[tobyhill]

I hope they can quickly get it out of development to up and running. I was reading another thread about the eco-twirps yelling that the energy bill will increase the price of gas and other energy uses. The point they miss is the interconnection of all factors. Nuclear and coal decreases the use of natural gas and sour crude. New refining capabilities allow for the removal of sulfurs in a safe manner of sour that we will get from ANWR. We have a lot of sour crude and the technology to process it now let's do it. I like the part of the energy bill that gives the feds additional authority over idiotic states who abuse their authority on "environmental standards". States should have rights within reason but it's flat out ridiculous that states like California has 14 different blends of gas that can't do any better for the environment than 6 blends. It's like choosing between 90 octane and 90.25 octane. The rats are going to hold out in the Senate until they "mileage standards" but that flies in the face of capitalism. If GM and Ford want to have a surplus of tanks that they can't get rid of then that's their problem the market will eventually work itself out when the auto manufacturers have to take the lose. They will then be forced to become visionaries. If Sally Sue wants to buy the tank then that's called freedom of choice. Sally Sue, as a consumer, will also have to accept the conditions of her buy, large gas tanks, low mpg but that's her right. The only thing America has to do is become less dependent on foreign sources and convergence does that.

[Blue_Spark]

I heard on Lars Larson's radio program recently that one of the professors at Oregon State Univ. said one of their reactor designs could produce an equivalent of 500,000 gal. gasoline in the form of H2 per DAY! I do not know the exact process, could be a combination of temperature/pressure and catalyst.

[DustyMoment]

$1.3B isn't enough to pour the foundation. The Commanche Peak nuclear reactor in Texas was sold to the public for a price tag of $750M. By the time they completed it and started bringing the reactors online, it had taken 15 years to build and cost $15B.

Get ready, Idaho, the circus is going to be rolling in just any day, now!

[Cobra64]

Reactors cost way more than $1.3 Billion my friend.

Agreed. About double that.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Is that the actual reactor or the Paper work?

[Pan_Yan]

Thanks for the ping.

I did a lot of research on civilian nuclear power for a school paper last fall (boy was it fun to watch the college airheads squirm at the idea).

It would be nice to see congress get fully behind Gen III technology. Of course, it would be nice to see the nuclear industry get off of government subsidies too.

[Pan_Yan]

Idaho has a unique position when it comes to nuclear power. When I was there in 1990 they had 63 reactors up and running. Idaho Falls has the largest percentage of college graduates of any city in the U.S.

They already have the equipment, location, security, experience and personnel in place. Building a reactor in INEL is like building a skyscraper in NYC. It seems like an almost impossible task until you watch experienced professionals do it.