What will the future of energy look like?

reprocessing

BTLS Expert Panel Debate - Detroit (1/5)

You are missing some Flash content that should appear here! Perhaps your browser cannot display it, or maybe it did not initialize correctly.

Check out the first round of Beyond the Light Switch's expert panelist follow-up series: This discussion, moderated by host David Biello, is the first in a series of round-tables currently being produced by specially-selected PBS stations throughout the U.S. These debates will bring together regional energy experts and key industry players in order to examine the pressing issues currently surrounding our energy economy. The purpose of each panel is to further explore the themes introduced in Beyond the Light Switch—the way we generate and use electricity—from a state-specific perspective.
 

 

BTLS Expert Panel Debate - Detroit (3/5)

You are missing some Flash content that should appear here! Perhaps your browser cannot display it, or maybe it did not initialize correctly.

Part 3: David Biello brings up the feasibility of 'clean coal'; the panel debates the meaning of the term and turns their attention to Anthony Earley, Jr. of DTE Energy, Michigan's largest utility, who describes his experiences with Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technology. Cost, policy structure, and Renewable Portfolio Standards are also discussed.

BTLS Expert Panel Debate - Detroit (4/5)

You are missing some Flash content that should appear here! Perhaps your browser cannot display it, or maybe it did not initialize correctly.

Part 4: The panel debates the environmental impacts of natural gas—including concerns about the regulation of wildcat drillers and fracking for gas in Michigan. Dr. Soji Adelaja emphasizes the importance of public awareness and education when it comes to evolving our current policy structure. The global impact of our energy policy is also put into perspective by Dr. Assanis, and David asks each panelist to share their ideal energy mix.

Michigan-based Expert Panel:
Anthony Earley, Jr. Executive Director, DTE Energy Foundation
Anne Woiwode, Director, Sierra Club - Michigan Chapter

Fate of U.S. Nuclear Industry Remains Uncertain

Three decades after the one-two punch of Three Mile Island (1979) and the Chernobyl disaster (1986) decimated the public image of nuclear power, and the American nuclear industry is still working hard to win back the public's trust. Moreover—and as David Biello points out in Beyond the Light Switch—they’ve actually done pretty well so far. In the American Nuclear Society's own words, "The nuclear industry's commitment to safe packaging and security has produced a safety record that would be difficult to match."

The ANS website goes on to describe their success in further detail, specifically citing their safety record when it comes to the transportation of radioactive materials: "Over the past 40 years, about 3,000 shipments of spent nuclear fuel have navigated more than 1.7 million miles of U.S. roads and railways.  Of all this travel, no radioactive materials have been released resulting from an accident or any other cause.  During this same period, there have been about 98 million kilograms of spent nuclear fuel shipped worldwide, with no record of any release of radioactive material."

And the public has taken notice. Stewart Brand, lifelong environmentalist and creator of the Whole Earth Catalog,  goes on record as a pro-nuclear convert in Beyond the Light Switch. Brand points to the growing threat of climate change as a major factor behind many former nuclear foes' reevaluation of nuclear power’s potential low-carbon benefits. It seems a lot of people are ready to rethink nuclear and—surprise!—the government is on board, too. In this week's State of the Union Address, President Obama singled out the efforts currently being undertaken by Oak Ridge National Laboratory to improve the efficiency of our existing nuclear plants.

Obama's praise of Oak Ridge was followed by the obligatory promise of breaking our nation’s longstanding dependence on foreign oil—check out this clip from The Daily Show for further [read: hilarious] contextualization. But Obama also stressed the importance of redirecting taxpayer dollars toward "tomorrow's" energy resources. This led to the other obligatory energy economy ‘shout-out’: green job creation. In this year's SOTU, President Obama set the new goal of generating 80% of America’s electricity from clean energy sources like wind, solar, and nuclear…by 2035. An ambitious challenge, sure…but building that much nuclear generation isn’t going to be easy. Nuclear may now be considered green, but it’s still expensive to build, and strong federal support is going to be vital.

There's one other big problem standing in the way of a nuclear renaissance; remember how the nuclear industry spent the past 30 years working to try and clean up their tarnished image? 

Should The U.S. Be Reprocessing Spent Nuclear Fuel?

Nuclear reprocessing. You often see it in the news, usually related to what countries are doing it and why. Reprocessing in India and China may get more ink, but the the U.K. & France do far more of it. In the United States, on the other hand, we do not currently reprocess our spent nuclear fuel. So why not? Now that many environmentalists are reevaluating nuclear power (thanks to its status as a low-carbon fuel), many are asking just that: why shouldn't we be recycling this stuff? Almost seems like the least we can do, given the complications of mining and transporting uranium, right?

Not so fast. The fellows at The Union of Concerned Scientists aren't quite so keen on reprocessing. In fact, they're actually quite...concerned about it. As scientists. In their own words, here's what their list of major concerns boils down to:

 

  • Reprocessing would increase the risk of nuclear terrorism.
  • Reprocessing would increase the ease of nuclear proliferation.
  • Reprocessing would hurt U.S. nuclear waste management efforts.
  • Reprocessing would be very expensive.

Very legitimate-sounding concerns, scary-sounding, even—but not everyone would agree. After all, France and Britain seem to be doing alright and they've been reprocessing for decades. To find out more about the argument for reprocessing, we talked to CEO of Duke Energy (and Beyond the Light Switch expert) Jim Rogers.

Jim Rogers knows energy. Just this past Monday he rolled out plans for a $13.7 billion megadeal that will make Duke Energy the largest electric utility in the nation. So how can he consider something that has raised such serious concerns in the past to now be no different than "recycling"? First, Rogers addressed fears that reprocessing will create a greater risk of nuclear terrorism, saying that he finds it much easier to mitigate the risk of proliferation "in the 

Syndicate content