Obama’s “clean energy standard” will give $36 billion to nuclear industry
“We don’t think nuclear loan guarantees are a very good bet,” given the industry’s history of cost overruns, said Robert Cowin, a Washington representative for the Union of Concerned Scientists based in Cambridge, Massachusetts. “The $36 billion the president has proposed is excessive.”
Obama Would Triple Guarantees for Nuclear Reactors, Bloomberg, By Simon Lomax and Jim Snyder – Feb 15, 2011 President Barack Obama’s 2012 budget almost triples U.S. loan guarantees for nuclear power-plant construction, funds development of a new breed of smaller reactors and spends more on “breakthrough” energy research.
The Energy Department would get $29.5 billion, a 12 percent increase, to support Obama’s proposed “clean-energy standard,” which requires 80 percent of U.S. electricity to come from low- pollution sources by 2035, according to the fiscal 2012 budget released today. The proposed standard is part of Obama’s policy “to ensure strong American leadership in the clean-energy economy,” according to the budget plan.
A program that guarantees as much as $18.5 billion in loans for construction of nuclear reactors would expand by $36 billion in 2012, to backstop $54.5 billion in lending. An initiative to develop designs for “small modular reactors” would get $67 million. Such reactors would be about a third the size of those now used by U.S. power companies, according to the department.
“We don’t think nuclear loan guarantees are a very good bet,” given the industry’s history of cost overruns, said Robert Cowin, a Washington representative for the Union of Concerned Scientists based in Cambridge, Massachusetts. “The $36 billion the president has proposed is excessive.”
Obama Would Triple Guarantees for Nuclear Reactors – Bloomberg
No comments yet.
1.This month.
Zoom webinar – “Nuclear Winter: The Environmental Consequences of a Nuclear Exchange.”
April 7th at 11:30 am PST / 2:30 pm EST
Nuclear Winter: The Environmental Consequences of a Nuclear Exchange”
Join us for an informative webinar with renowned atmospheric scientist, Professor Brian Toon, as he discusses the environmental risks and global impacts of a nuclear war. Despite the potential damage caused by the blast from even small nuclear weapons, many countries continue to invest in and expand nuclear arsenals. Professor Toon will provide a scientific assessment of civilian fatalities, agricultural failures, climate concerns, and complications with food supply that would follow any international nuclear conflict. We need to plan how to prevent nuclear conflict and avoid catastrophe. Politicians and military planners must be made aware of global climate and agricultural complications that would ensue. Don’t miss this opportunity to learn from, and engage in, this vital conversation
The Road to War brings a sharp focus to why it is not in Australia’s best interest to be dragged into a war with China which will almost inevitably go nuclear very quickly. The filmmaker has interviewed some of Australia’s senior foreign policy analysts who have vast experience behind them in analysing what really is going on here as the United States rattles its sabres with China. And sets us up to be its proxy, like the poor Ukranians have been fed into the Meatgrinder. So America can remain the Top Dog. The Road to War reveals how the United States through its spy base at Pine Gap and by stationing six nuclear capable B52 bombers in the Top End (without permission from the traditional owners) is making Australia a prime nuclear target if the current war of words suddenly melts down into full scale war.
The Road to War shows the implicit connection between Carbon emissions (the US military uses a whopping 70% of America’s annual petroleum to move its armies and vast War Machine around the globe to its 800+ military bases..but under a loophole wangled at Kyoto, the US military does not have to report its C02 annual emissions). The Road to War starts screening at selected cities and regional centres in March. See the trailer end for details.
Antinuclear 
Leave a Reply