Gov. Whitman writes:

 Today, a total of 104 nuclear reactors are operational around the country. They provide about 20 percent of the country’s total electricity. No other electricity source can combine the benefits of knowing that it will always be on with its affordability and its lack of emissions.

 The operational price, excluding the costs of building the power plant, is about 2 cents per kilowatt hour — a third less than coal and half of the price of gas.

This cheap, always available, zero-carbon power is an important backstop to the growth of new technologies. It can help smooth the price fluctuations that natural gas is vulnerable to and it provides the “always on” capacity that renewable power cannot.

Interested in Gov. Whitman’s thoughts on nuclear energy? Check out this blog post she recently wrote for Clean Energy Buzz. Also, stay tuned to our blog andTwitter handle for some upcoming media interviews with Gov. Whitman.

Gov. Whitman writes:

“While the industry is working to build upon the safety measures already in place, there are others taking a less productive approach, using this crisis to press for a ban on all future nuclear energy investments and a shutdown of current U.S. nuclear power plants, despite the continued support by the current administration and many policymakers.

Too often emotional appeals don’t consider the facts. Nuclear energy facilities in 31 states supply low-carbon electricity to one of every five U.S. homes and businesses.  Clean, safe, nuclear will always be a part of our country’s energy portfolio.  It would take decades- and tens of billions of dollars- to replace that capacity.  This is the new post-Fukushima energy reality.

With America’s energy needs forecasted to grow 24% by 2035, the U.S. can’t afford to lose base-load power and will need new sources of energy.”

To read the full piece in Spanish, click here or read the English translation here.

Are you interested in activating your voice in support of clean, safe, reliable nuclear energy? Whether it be penning a letter to the editor, speaking at a relevant energy conference or participating in a guest blog post, let us know atMembership@CASEnergy.org. We look forward to hearing from you!

“The reality is that while a loss-of-power incident can occur at our nuclear plants, the disastrous circumstances that led to the Fukushima events are much less likely. We are better prepared because of the Fukushima incident, which caused our Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to undertake a review of all our reactors to ensure that Fukushima could not happen here. We are not susceptible to an earthquake or tsunami of the enormous magnitude that occurred in Japan, which meant that the emergency generators were swamped by waves that exceeded the height of the reactor building, and that roads were impassable to bring in other generators or fuel for them.

Through all our hurricanes in Florida, we have never seen a similar situation. Regardless, the utilities and the NRC are looking closely at what can be done to beef up defenses at our nuclear plants. The odds are infinitesimal that we can experience a Fukushima type accident. If you remember, the Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Station was hit directly by Hurricane Andrew and survived in fine fashion.”

To read the full piece, click here. Are you interested in activating your voice in support of clean, safe, reliable nuclear energy? Whether it be penning a letter to the editor, speaking at a relevant energy conference or participating in a guest blog post, let us know at Membership@CASEnergy.org. We look forward to hearing from you!

Hilda Pinnix-Ragland is the Chair of the CASEnergy Coalition Business, Labor & Minority Steering Committee and V.P., Corporate Public Affairs, Progress Energy Service Company

By Hilda Pinnix-Ragland

Friday, July 22, 2011

With ongoing concerns about the economy, a sustainable U.S. energy policy is now more important than ever. The future of energy security in America depends on our ability to take ownership of our energy production. Central to this objective will be ensuring a diverse, domestic energy supply that is clean, cost-efficient, and reliable- and most importantly, it must be safe.

Events at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear energy facility in Japan have raised questions about nuclear safety here at home. Even though there are clear differences between the Japanese and U.S. approaches to the operation of nuclear energy facilities, answering these questions and applying every possible lesson from the accident in Japan will be central to ensuring that we can continue to count on the country’s largest 24/7 clean energy source.

From a pragmatic approach, nuclear energy must always be a part of our country’s clean energy portfolio – it produces 20 percent of our electricity, comprising more than 70 percent of our emissions-free energy. With the demand for electricity projected to grow 28 percent by 2035, it is imperative that we be able to meet that rising demand cleanly. This is our energy reality.

American nuclear energy facilities and their operators are trained and equipped to manage extreme, natural and plant-centered events. They are trained to expect the unexpected – and plan for it. Over the years, the industry has made significant improvements to physical structures and in emergency response capabilities to help effectively manage extreme, abnormal events.

Following the events in Japan, the independent U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), as well as operators of the nation’s nuclear energy facilities nationwide have all renewed their commitment to continue to improve safety at all of our plants. For instance, the NRC is mandating new steps to ensure facilities can continue to withstand the effects of natural disasters. This may include locating backup emergency cooling equipment away from areas that may be susceptible to flooding or damage from earthquakes. Also under close review are the procedures and equipment needed should events occur simultaneously at more than one reactor at a single nuclear energy facility.

This is not the first time the country’s nuclear energy industry has taken such measures. The industry is focused on continuous improvement in all areas of operation. After the terrorist events of Sept. 11, 2001, the industry thoroughly reviewed security risks and invested about $2 billion in security upgrades . In the wake of the Fukushima Daiichi accident, the industry is once again recalibrating its best practices to ensure the highest standards of safety and security are met.

The NRC and many of our nation’s leaders recognize that U.S. reactors are safe, and I certainly agree. This consensus is based on the multiple layers of protection that fortify each nuclear energy facility in the U.S.; the continuous review and inspection of each facility; and the decades of sustained performance with record levels of safety and reliability.

Nuclear energy is a vital part of America’s electricity portfolio and an energy-independent future. The industry is taking important steps today to make nuclear energy facilities even safer and ensure they will be available, because they are a major part of a more secure, clean-energy future.

June 23, 2011

By Dr. Patrick Moore and Roger Rivera

The joint op-ed below was submitted by CASEnergy co-chair Dr. Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace, longtime environmentalist and nuclear energy advocate, and National Hispanic Environmental Council President Roger Rivera. As part of the Clean and Safe Energy (CASEnergy) Coalition’s activity in Texas,  Moore is in San Antonio this week for NALEO’s annual conference to discuss the future of nuclear power in the U.S. post-Fukushima, along with a number of Hispanic CASEnergy members (including TX State Senator Leticia Van De Putte). Moore will be meeting with various conference attendees and Hispanic leaders focused on energy policy and energy security in the U.S. and Texas to discuss the economic and environmental benefits of nuclear power as part of a clean energy portfolio for the Hispanic community.

Now more than ever, the future of energy security in America depends on the country’s ability to take ownership of its energy production. Central to this mission will be providing a diverse, domestic energy supply that is clean, cost-effective, and reliable. But above all else, it must be safe.

Recent events at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear energy facility in Japan have once more raised questions about nuclear safety both in Texas and across the country. On the surface, this appears to complicate our discussion on energy security with respect to nuclear energy.

However, answering these questions and applying every possible lesson from the accident in Japan will be critical to ensuring that Texas and other states can continue to count on emissions-free nuclear energy as a core part of their sustainable clean energy portfolio to meet rising demand.

Nuclear energy will always be a part of Texas’s clean energy portfolio – it produces a little over 10% of the State’s electricity, which is nearly 60% of its electricity that is emissions-free. Texas is one of the 10 largest states in terms of nuclear capacity. To replace that capacity would take decades and tens of billions of dollars. And with the demand for electricity in Texas projected to grow by nearly 50 percent by 2030, it is imperative that the state be able to build on its long history of using safe and reliable nuclear energy to meet that rising demand cleanly.

With this knowledge, the independent U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), as well as operators of the nation’s nuclear energy facilities nationwide and here in Texas, are renewing their commitment to secure yet safer facilities.

For instance, the NRC is mandating new steps to ensure facilities can truly withstand natural disasters. This may include locating backup emergency cooling equipment away from areas that may be susceptible to flooding or damage from earthquakes. Also under close review are the procedures and equipment needed should events occur simultaneously at more than one reactor at a single nuclear energy facility.

But it’s also important to know that American nuclear energy facilities and their operators are equipped to manage severe, natural and plant-centered events similar to those experienced in Japan. They are trained to expect the unexpected – and plan for it. Over the years, the industry has made significant improvements to physical structures and in emergency response capabilities to help effectively manage severe, abnormal events.

This is not the first time the country’s nuclear energy industry has taken on such measures. It reviewed such matters following Hurricanes Andrew and Katrina. And after the terrorist events of Sept. 11, 2001, the industry thoroughly reviewed security issues and invested about $2 billion in security upgrades. In the wake of the Fukushima Daiichi accident, the industry is once again recalibrating its best practices to ensure the highest standards of safety and security are met.

Still, as generations of Texans can attest, energy production isn’t easy. One of the best ways to mitigate the risks faced by any energy source is by building a strong portfolio of balanced energy alternatives, including renewable energy. Texas knows this all too well – state-sponsored support for wind energy has helped that technology become a key contributor to its electricity supply. Emissions-free nuclear energy, which provides affordable power around-the-clock, has helped Texas work wind energy into its energy mix without sacrificing reliability or household budgets.

This week, Hispanic leaders are gathering at the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials’ (NALEO) national conference to address a whole host of policy issues impacting the Latino community.

On the issue of energy security and nuclear power, we support using the best science available to reach the best decisions possible. We also believe it is important that Latino leaders understand why it’s necessary to include nuclear energy as part of a balanced portfolio of clean energy sources, a position strongly supported by President Obama and key Congressional leaders. The President understands that it will take more clean energy options, and not fewer, to meet our growing energy demands responsibly. Learning from Fukushima to make the nuclear energy industry safer and more accountable is a major step to help ensure that Texas’s and America’s clean energy promise comes to fruition.

Dr. Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace and co-chair of the Clean and Safe Energy (CASEnergy) Coalition, is in San Antonio this week for the National Association of Latino Elected & Appointed Officials (NALEO) national conference. Roger Rivera is the President of the National Hispanic Environmental Council and member of CASEnergy.

Special to the San Jose Mercury News

June 7, 2011

In the wake of events in Japan that damaged Fukushima Daiichi’s nuclear reactors, Americans must resist the temptation to make hasty conclusions about the future of nuclear energy.

If you care about global climate change and believe we must reduce the impact of greenhouse gases through a portfolio of clean energy options, you cannot rule out nuclear energy. Doing so would undermine environmental goals and compromise air quality.

There are some who suggest that the future growth of nuclear energy in America be stopped. Such a position is shortsighted, for it exposes this country and the world to the potential for far greater environmental damage and lessens overall energy security.

Germany recently announced that it would shut down all 17 reactors by 2022. In light of the news that global greenhouse gas emissions reached a record high in 2010, such a course of action seems inconsistent with Germany’s climate change goals.

A quick perspective check on whether such an announcement is likely to become a reality: 30 years ago Sweden voted to phase out its 12 nuclear power plants by 2010. Eleven of them still operate today.

It is unrealistic to phase out one of the largest clean-energy sources that is able to meet a 24/7 baseload electricity demand. Few other energy sources can meet the world’s future clean energy needs on the same scale as nuclear energy. More than 100 reactors in 31 states provide 20 percent of U.S. electricity. About one-third of all U.S. electricity is generated by low-carbon sources, and nuclear energy accounts for 70 percent of all low-carbon electricity production. It would take decades — and tens of billions of dollars — to replace that capacity.

Events in Japan have rightly prompted a review of nuclear energy facilities around the world. This will only help bolster already extremely high safety standards, together with better preparedness at U.S. plants to withstand extreme adverse conditions.

It is important to note that all U.S. nuclear energy facilities are built to withstand strong natural forces, including earthquakes and tsunamis. Even plants located in areas with low and moderate seismic activity are designed for safety in the event of such a disaster. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission requires that safety-significant structures, systems, and components be designed to take into account even rare and extreme seismic and tsunami events.

Moreover, new plants are analyzed using advanced seismic assessment techniques that characterize the ground motion levels at the proposed site. Each U.S. nuclear energy facility has sensitive monitoring instruments systems to detect seismic activity, and the plants will shut down safely if ground motion exceeds a specified level.

In California, both the Diablo Canyon and San Onofre nuclear plants are designed to withstand ground forces even higher than recorded during the March tremors in Japan. One of the problems in the Japanese incident was the earthquake and resulting tsunami were beyond the Fukushima’s Daiichi plant’s structural design capabilities.

I am confident that electric companies here in the United States are accounting for additional kinds of risks, taking the lessons that will be learned from the events in Japan in both the short term and long term, and remain committed to operating nuclear energy facilities safely.

No energy source is without risk, and it is appropriate to re-examine the safety of nuclear energy at this time. However, we must remember that nuclear energy offers an environmentally responsible way to power the economy today and for the future. It is important to maintain a proven, American technology that has demonstrated the ability to reduce air pollution and greenhouse gases while generating electricity at an affordable cost to consumers.
PATRICK MOORE, co-founder of Greenpeace, is co-chair of the Clean and Safe Energy Coalition, which supports the use of nuclear energy as part of a portfolio of clean energy sources. He wrote this article for this newspaper.

By Frank Stewart, President and COO of the American Association of Blacks in Energy and Michael Hill, Executive Vice President of Lincoln University

April 18, 2011

While we each come from different backgrounds and perspectives, we each have been engaged in the national discussion about nuclear energy. We know its benefits – an affordable, available and reliable source of electricity that doesn’t generate greenhouse gases.

It is because we have been such active and vocal proponents of nuclear energy that we feel compelled to weigh in now, at this critical juncture for America’s energy future and in the wake of the tragic events unfolding in Japan.

First and foremost, our hearts are with the thousands of Japanese families affected by the recent earthquake and resulting tsunami. These disasters have had an unprecedented impact on people throughout the Sendai region and in many other parts of the country. We have been watching with admiration as the engineers at the Fukushima nuclear facility bravely work to stabilize the damaged reactors.

For all of us, it’s natural to have questions – about the safety of our nuclear plants here at home and about the role that nuclear energy can and should play in the United States moving forward. In times like these, it is always prudent to pause, reflect and look at the facts.

When the earthquake hit, the Fukushima plant’s reactors did exactly what they were designed to do – they shut down. It was the ensuing tsunami that disabled the emergency generators used to power the reactor’s cooling systems.

While this combination of multiple disasters never happened before, our nuclear plants must be ready for any eventuality. That’s why we were pleased to learn that the nuclear energy industry has taken steps to review the safety of every one of America’s nuclear power plants. In close coordination with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the government agency that oversees the industry, each facility’s capability to maintain safety is being verified, even in the face of unthinkable disasters. Specifically, in light of what happened to Japanese reactors, U.S. plants are making sure that even a total loss of electric power will not disable a reactor’s critical cooling systems. We have every confidence that our U.S. nuclear energy plants will be even stronger based on what we learn from the situation in Japan.

Still, there are those who may be tempted to write nuclear energy off altogether. That would be unfortunate. It would also be unrealistic. Many don’t realize it, but nuclear energy provides 20 percent of the electricity our nation uses. Replacing that capacity would require decades of time and tens of billions of dollars. And nuclear energy remains one of our country’s cleanest energy options, accounting for 70 percent of America’s carbon-free power every year. In the years ahead, its role helping to rein in GHG emissions will only increase.

President Obama is right when he says that we cannot take nuclear power off the table. If anything, it’s going to need to play an even bigger role in producing the clean, affordable and reliable energy we’ll need in the future. As we continue to keep the people of Japan in our hearts and thoughts, it’s encouraging to know that the lessons we are learning there are being applied here. This will help to ensure that the nuclear industry can continue providing the clean, safe, cost-efficient energy our communities deserve.

Gov. Whitman writes that in light of recent events at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant in Japan, the stakes for nuclear power in the U.S. could not be higher and supports industry response: providing humanitarian and technical support and conducting a thorough safety review at all U.S. nuclear power plants.

While immediate attention and focus should be on improving the situation in Japan, Gov. Whitman writes that we should also apply those lessons learned back here at home – as we have done in the past with the 2004 Asian tsunami and the 9/11 terror attacks.

Already steps have been taken by both industry and regulators to ensure an appropriate response.  The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has commenced a thorough review of all U.S. plants over the next 90 days, and the industry is doing its part too: “The U.S. nuclear energy industry is in the process of verifying each plant’s capability to maintain safety – even with severe adverse events, including loss of significant operational and safety systems due to natural events, like flooding, earthquakes and fires; as well as aircraft impact and explosions,” Gov. Whitman writes.

As for the future, Gov. Whitman believes nuclear energy will continue to be an important energy source in the U.S., as “one of our country’s cleanest energy options.”  It already provides 20 percent of our nation’s power and 70 percent of the nation’s carbon free power every year.  Moving away from nuclear power is not realistic as “it would take decades –  and tens of billions of dollars –  to replace that capacity,” according to Gov. Whitman. She went on to argue that, “No other energy source can now meet the nation’s future clean energy needs on the same scale.”

That’s why it’s critical to further examine and strengthen safety protocol and emergency response procedures at U.S. nuclear plants so we can continue to benefit from this clean energy source.

Please read Gov. Whitman’s full opinion piece here and let us know what you think.

By Jeffrey Merrifield

March 29, 2011

While many are taking measured responses to the recent events in Japan, there has been one predictable exception. 
 

Members of the anti-nuclear community and their supporters in Congress have taken to the media to demand that some or all of our nation’s 104 nuclear power plants be shut down and construction of new nuclear power plants be stopped.

Read the rest of Jeff’s op-ed at thehill.com here.

By CHRISTINE TODD WHITMAN

March 31, 2011

After helping Japan, we must take steps to review the safety of U.S. plants, the author writes.

As a leading advocate for nuclear energy, it saddens me to see the news from Japan. Nuclear engineers, working under extremely dangerous circumstances, are in an hourly struggle to prevent disaster at that nation’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant. The stakes could not be higher.

At times like this, it is critical we do two things. First, we must help. Indeed, the nuclear energy industry is offering extensive technical and humanitarian support.

Read the rest on Politico.com here.