Remarks by Energy
Secretary Spencer Abraham
World Nuclear Association Luncheon
Monday August 5, 2002
Good afternoon. Thank you for inviting me to speak to this important gathering.
A luncheon such as this brings together the right people at the right time to discuss the bright future we envision for nuclear energy, both in my country and around the globe.
I especially want to thank Chairman Tony Cooper and Director General Adrian Ham of the British Nuclear Industry Forum, as well as Chairman Gerald Grandey and Director General John Ritch of the World Nuclear Association, for hosting me today.
I also want to recognize Bill Magwood, who directs our Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology. Bill has done an outstanding job helping to enhance nuclear power in America and ensure energy security for us and our allies.
When we took office in January of last year, one of our first jobs was to put together a national energy policy addressing the long-term issues related to ensuring energy security deep into the 21st century.
One of the central elements of this policy was our plan for a diverse mix of fuels for the 21st Century economy, including oil, natural gas, hydropower and other renewables, coal and nuclear energy.
Forcefully declaring that nuclear power should be part of the world?s fuel mix took some people by surprise, but to us it was just common sense.
We studied the issue of nuclear energy carefully.
We studied the industry, its history, its recent progress, its ongoing research, and its future promise ? and we came to the undeniable conclusion that there are compelling arguments in favor of nuclear energy.
We also concluded that to promote the role of nuclear power, several things had to happen.
First, we would have to make the case for nuclear power in 21st century terms.
And second, we would need to address a number of challenges that must be addressed forthrightly.
Let me start by talking about the 21st century rationale for nuclear energy.
As you know, nuclear power is no longer a young technology. It dates back nearly seventy years, to a time when men like Fermi and Einstein first contemplated the awesome power of the atom.
Sixty years ago that power was used to end World War II and to keep our Cold War adversaries in check.
And fifty years ago, in the aftermath of World War II, engineers and scientists began considering the civilian uses of nuclear power.
It is safe to say that when nuclear energy was considered for civilian uses, the arguments recommending nuclear power were very different from the arguments recommending it today.
Back then the idea was to move from the destructive to the constructive power of nuclear fission as President Eisenhower said, "to move out of the dark chamber of horrors into the light."
In the first years of the "Atoms to Peace" program, arguments were put forth explaining how nuclear energy could be mobilized to apply to the fields of agriculture, medicine, and who knew what else the future might hold.
Moreover atomic energy might be employed to generate electricity ? at the time, not so much for the United States and other developed nations, it was argued ? but for the "power-starved areas of the world."
These were compelling arguments then, and they successfully bolstered the civilian application of nuclear energy.
So successful have these efforts been that nuclear energy now accounts for 20 percent of American electricity generation, and not much less worldwide.
But what I?d like to suggest is that there are additional arguments for nuclear power today that are relevant to today?s realities.
And they are arguments that reflect the same optimism and hope that our parents and grandparents showed a half-century ago and reflect policy imperatives that were either unknown or not well understood at the dawn of the atomic age.
The first imperative reflects our commitment to a clean environment.
Nuclear power plants emit none of the pollutants associated with the burning of fossil fuels.
Nuclear powered plants in the eastern part of the U.S. have made it possible for many states to meet the requirements of our federal Clean Air Act.
Since the mid-1970s, in fact, nuclear energy has enabled the U.S. to avoid emitting over 80 million tons of sulfur dioxide and about 40 million tons of nitrogen oxides.
The second imperative is to supply energy that is both abundant and affordable.
As many of you know, our Administration has identified hydrogen as being a potential source of unlimited and clean energy.
We envision a day when hydrogen powers a variety of stationary and moving users of power, from cars, light trucks, and 18-wheelers to office parks, factories, and shopping malls.
But this is a vision that will take several decades to implement. And one of the challenges will be to cleanly and efficiently produce hydrogen.
What is exciting about nuclear energy is that it promises to do exactly that.
Finally, there is the policy debate surrounding the issue of climate change.
It is obvious to me that an energy source capable of supplying a significant proportion of the world?s power with no greenhouse gas emissions should be at the center of this debate.
Nuclear power could, conceivably, accomplish far more toward eliminating greenhouse gas emissions than many of the proposals to sacrifice economic growth put forward by those who advocate the Kyoto Protocol.
Yet many of the fiercest enthusiasts for Kyoto are the most ferocious opponents of nuclear power.
To put it bluntly, the opponents of nuclear power offer an illogical and inherently inconsistent argument.
These are folks who happily embrace the virtues of solar power, wind power, and biomass, but somehow miss the reality that nuclear power has the same type of benefits touted for renewable energy sources, along with the added virtue of being extraordinarily economical.
Now, my point is not to knock the benefits of renewable energy.
In fact, our Administration is aggressively pursuing these technologies. Rather, my point is simply that the arguments for clean power ought to be applied fairly.
But it is not enough for us to criticize others? arguments.
To be honest, we need to do a better job of clarifying the true arguments for nuclear power.
Think about it the greenhouse gas question concerns about the cleanliness of our skies and waterways dependable supplies of energy.
Nuclear energy has something relevant to say to each of these issues. Therefore it is incumbent on those of us in the public policy arena to articulate this case for nuclear power in a 21st century context.
Each of us must take on the challenge of educating a public that in some instances might not have considered certain benefits of nuclear energy, or in other instances might be laboring under misperceptions.
All of us in this room are aware of the tremendous progress made by the nuclear industry in the last several decades.
Plants are vastly more efficient than before. They are better run and better managed than in the past.
And the improved management practices standard at today?s nuclear power plants not surprisingly have been accompanied by huge improvements in safety.
Many people who aren?t as intimately acquainted with nuclear energy?s success story are unaware of these technological and safety developments.
Their impressions are frozen in a time marked by bellbottom jeans, 8-track tapes, and Nottingham Forest winning the old First Division.
But it?s not the 1970s any more. Nuclear power today is safer than ever, more reliable than ever, less expensive than ever, and it is absolutely vital for our future.
Besides making a better case for nuclear power, we must also recognize there are several direct obstacles that have to be surmounted.
We have to address the practical considerations that, if left unaddressed, might prevent nuclear energy from continuing to play a significant role in our energy mix.
One thing that has become clear over the last few decades is that significant barriers make it extremely difficult for a utility to make the business decision to order a new nuclear power plant.
So the question before us is, how do we remove the impediments that increase financial risk and create uncertainty?
Let me spend a few moments walking through some actions our Administration has taken recently to foster the sort of environment necessary for nuclear power?s success.
First is the issue of liability. A system must be in place that guarantees compensation for victims of nuclear accidents, and it must be clear to all parties what the parameters of that liability are.
We are working with Congress on extending our Price Anderson Act, which guarantees compensation in the event of a catastrophic event.
The second issue deals with the question of nuclear waste.
As you probably know, earlier this year President Bush recommended Yucca Mountain, located in Nevada in the western United States, as the nation?s permanent repository for high-level nuclear waste.
I am pleased that our Congress recently approved our recommendation with large bipartisan majorities in both houses ? a crucial victory for nuclear power.
A third challenge is to actively push forward on nuclear research and development while at the same time trying to overcome no longer appropriate or more beneficial regulatory hurdles.
One of these efforts is an ambitious initiative we announced this past February called Nuclear Power 2010, which aims at getting a new nuclear power plant built and brought online by the end of this decade.
Nuclear Power 2010 involves the government and the private sector working closely together to explore sites that could host new nuclear plants to: demonstrate the effectiveness of key Nuclear Regulatory Commission processes designed to make licensing of new plants more efficient and predictable, and to conduct the research needed to make the safest and most advanced nuclear plant technologies available in the United States.
It is our intent to establish a competitive process that encourages utilities to coalesce around the most promising nuclear plant technologies.
We believe that one or two nuclear plant designs are already close to meeting the economic requirements of the market, and we will consider supporting the certification of these designs and their application in a "one-step" licensing process.
Proving that this "one-step" licensing process works will be crucial to removing a major risk of investing in new nuclear power plants.
There are a number of other actions the United States government can take to help the development of advanced nuclear technologies, both near term and long term.
In the short run, we plan to work with both industry and our international partners to conduct the research needed to ensure that advanced gas reactor technology ? such as the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor and the Gas Turbine Modular Helium Reactor ? can be considered real options in the U.S.
We are already working with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and industry to pave the way for these novel technologies.
But we also have our eyes on the longer term. That is why we are investing so heavily in Generation IV advanced nuclear technology.
While the second and third generation reactors we?ve relied on for several decades are adequate for today?s purposes, we envision a new era of nuclear energy marked by enhanced safety, improved waste reduction, better economic performance, and ---perhaps most importantly--- improved physical security and proliferation resistance.
Meeting this last challenge won?t just have beneficial effects for electricity generation.
Meeting it will go a long way toward safeguarding Americans and our allies from the perils posed by those seeking to acquire dangerous nuclear materials.
As you know, Generation IV isn?t just an American initiative. It?s a joint international effort that will ensure a safer, healthier planet.
And we are committed to working with you and with the scientists, engineers, and governments of other nations to make the next generation of nuclear technology available as quickly as possible.
Using mechanisms such as the Generation IV International Forum, we will be able to pool expertise and resources by developing the most promising nuclear technology together.
Finally, we are working with our counterparts in Russia to ensure the future viability of safe nuclear energy while at the same time helping to keep dangerous materials out of the wrong hands.
In fact, just last week I was in Moscow for a series of working meetings with Minister Rumyantsev of Minatom to investigate ways to further expand our partnership.
In recent months we have established two new bilateral working groups, and the Minister and I discussed ways to ensure their effectiveness.
The focus of the first of these working groups is to examine ways to further eliminate excess plutonium and highly enriched uranium ? materials that can be used to make nuclear weapons.
This group is working to identify initiatives that could lead to reductions in nuclear materials from weapons beyond the obligations stipulated in existing agreements and report its recommendations by mid-September.
The other working group is comprised of technical experts who explored areas of potential cooperation for combined research on advanced, proliferation-resistant nuclear reactor and fuel cycle technologies to reduce stocks of weapons-grade plutonium and highly enriched uranium as well as reduce waste produced by civilian reactors.
Minister Rumyantsev and I were pleased to receive the report of this working group last week.
Nuclear power offers great benefits, but also poses tremendous challenges. I believe that the American government has a clear role to help remove the barriers to an expanded role for nuclear power.
We have made very clear our willingness to embrace this role.
Nuclear Power 2010 expanded Gen IV advanced technology research Yucca Mountain increased cooperation with our international counterparts.
These are the steps taken by an Administration confident of nuclear power?s promise, and cognizant of what need to be done to guarantee it.
Thank you once again for letting me come speak with you today. I hope I have been able to convey a sense of our commitment to an enhanced role for nuclear power in ensuring the world?s energy security.
And I hope I have been able to convey to you the importance of making the 21st century case for nuclear power.
I look forward to continuing to work with all of you in the months and years ahead to establish a clear vision of the future and to carry out the work needed to realize that vision.