[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Reid challenges Price Anderson Act
Norm, you show a much greater understanding of this situation than so many of us whose goal in life is to be a victim. I greatly appreciate your
willingness to participate in RADSAFE.
The opinions expressed are strictly mine.
It's not about dose, it's about trust.
Let's look at the real problem, for a change.
Bill Lipton
liptonw@dteenergy.com
Norman Cohen wrote:
> Of course, there's politics involved. Reid is going to use his power at the #2
> guy in the Senate to try to block Yucca Mountain or to cut a deal that would
> benefit Nevada. Its the cutting of deals that should concern people on all sides
> of this issue.
>
> Norm
>
> > http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/2002/Jan-24-Thu-2002/news/17940904.html";>
> > http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/2002/Jan-24-Thu-2002/news/17940904.html</A>
> > =======================================================
> > January 24, 2002
> > Las Vegas Review-Journal
> >
> > NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS: Reid challenges insurance program
> > Law enacted in '50s for young industry criticized by some as crutch
> >
> > By STEVE TETREAULT
> > STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
> >
> > WASHINGTON -- Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., on Wednesday challenged a
> > government-backed insurance program that could leave taxpayers liable to pay
> > claims from catastrophic accidents at nuclear power plants.
> >
> > Reid said it may be time for fundamental changes in the Price-Anderson Act,
> > enacted in 1957 as a safety net for the then-fledgling nuclear power industry
> > but now criticized by some as a crutch. The industry defends the insurance
> > system as crucial to its workings.
> >
> > "The generation and selling of electricity are very different today than 50
> > years ago," Reid said at a hearing of the Senate's nuclear safety
> > subcommittee. "A new electricity market demands a new Price-Anderson system."
> >
> > Reid, the panel's chairman, invited testimony from government and industry
> > witnesses, and actor-model Christie Brinkley, who sits on the board of
> > Standing for Truth About Radiation, an anti-nuclear group on Long Island,
> > N.Y.
> >
> > Brinkley said as a mother of three living in the vicinity of three nuclear
> > reactor stations, she is concerned about safety, and beyond that the ability
> > of the nuclear industry to come up with adequate funds to pay claims in the
> > event of a catastrophic accident.
> >
> > "This discussion today is really about an industry owning up to its
> > responsibilities," Brinkley said. Reid praised her testimony "because you
> > speak for a lot of people."
> >
> > Reid said afterwards he plans to hold more hearings on the Price-Anderson Act
> > before deciding on a course of action this year.
> >
> > The current law expires in August. If the law expires, coverage would
> > continue for 103 commercial nuclear plants now operating, but government
> > backing would not be available for new facilities.
> >
> > Nevadans have taken interest in the act because it also covers accidents at
> > government nuclear facilities, including the radioactive waste repository
> > under consideration for Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
> >
> > Another controversial part of the law indemnifies government contractors
> > involved in nuclear accidents, even if they are found to be negligent. It
> > would cover contract operators of a nuclear waste repository and
> > transportation firms involved in shipping radioactive materials to a
> > repository.
> >
> > Price-Anderson requires nuclear plant operators to buy $200 million in
> > primary insurance per reactor, plus secondary insurance up to $88 million per
> > reactor that is put into an industry pool. The pool currently totals $9.5
> > billion and is to cover potential accidents at commercial plants and
> > government nuclear weapons facilities.
> >
> > The law requires Congress to step in, and presumably tap taxpayer funds, to
> > cover damages above $9.5 billion.
> >
> > Reid said the private insurance pool may be too small, citing a 1986 General
> > Accounting Office report stating costs of a nuclear accident could total
> > "hundreds of billions depending on which way the wind is blowing."
> >
> > He also questioned why the government gets behind insurance for nuclear power
> > when it doesn't extend the same treatment for other energy forms.
> >
> > "The nuclear power industry moved through adolescence and has not settled
> > into a comfortable middle age," he said. "It no longer needs the federal
> > government to nurture it."
> >
> > Peter Bradford, an energy lecturer at Yale University and a former member of
> > the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said Price-Anderson is "anti-competitive."
> >
> > As long as their accident liability is limited, companies have fewer
> > incentives to explore safer designs, he said.
> >
> > "It provides a subsidy to nuclear power plants compared to other sources of
> > electricity and renewables and even between nuclear power plant designs,"
> > Bradford said. New designs that might be inherently safer don't enjoy an
> > advantage because all would be treated the same under the law, he said.
> >
> > Bradford suggested calculating the monetary value of Price-Anderson to the
> > nuclear industry and then offering an equivalent amount to alternative fuels
> > that are "in the startup phase," where nuclear power was 45 years ago when
> > Price Anderson was established.
> >
> > Marvin Fertel, a senior vice president for the Nuclear Energy Institute,
> > disputed the notion the nuclear industry enjoys a subsidy. Power companies,
> > and by extension their ratepayers, bear the cost of insurance, he said.
> >
> > Fertel also argued no other energy provider is required to buy insurance as
> > the nuclear power industry is. "Risks of dam failure and flooding at
> > hydroelectric facilities are borne directly by the public, not the hydropower
> > facilities," he said.
> >
> > At one point, Fertel was talking about nuclear plant workers being concerned
> > about safety when Reid interrupted.
> >
> > "Doesn't Homer Simpson work in a nuclear plant?" he asked.
> >
> > "Homer Simpson works in Hollywood," Fertel responded.
> >
> > =========================================================
> >
>
> ************************************************************************
> You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
> send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
> radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/
************************************************************************
You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/