The nuclear energy startup Kairos is seeking approval to build a small test reactor at a government laboratory. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has reviewed Kairos’ application and conducted public hearings, finding the company’s environmental and safety reviews satisfactory. Surprisingly, there have been no opponents of nuclear energy challenging the regulators’ decision. However, there is still one bureaucratic hurdle remaining – a costly hearing that will delay permits for at least six months and cost Kairos nearly $500,000.
Some environmentalists who support nuclear power consider this hearing to be unnecessary and a waste of time. Former NRC officials also share this view. The NRC, on the other hand, claims that the hearing is required by law without offering any further defense. Federal scientists outside the regulatory agency even believe that the hearing should be abolished. Lawmakers from both parties have been attempting to eliminate the hearing for decades. As the United States increasingly relies on nuclear energy to replace fossil fuels and support renewables like wind and solar power, experts argue that these time-consuming and expensive hearings, which only serve to delay construction, are a luxury the country can’t afford. Judi Greenwald, executive director of the Nuclear Innovation Alliance, emphasizes the urgency of the situation, stating that “time is of the essence.”
Although there is growing bipartisan support for nuclear energy among voters, with 57% favoring more nuclear power plants, there is uncertainty when it comes to relaxing regulations on clean-energy infrastructure. Efforts to carry out routine functions at defunct nuclear plants or build facilities to store radioactive waste have been met with strong local protests. To address these concerns, Representative Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) questioned the NRC’s executive director about the impact of eliminating mandatory hearings on public confidence, but he stated that it would not affect the interests of those seeking a hearing and wouldn’t significantly decrease public confidence.
The requirement for the NRC to hold a public hearing at the end of the permitting process, even if uncontested, dates back to before the agency’s existence. In the 1950s, as Congress debated the role of private industry in nuclear plant development, a private utility in Detroit proposed a fast-breeder reactor design. Concerns about the design’s safety led to the requirement of mandatory uncontested hearings. Over time, federal laws have made the government more transparent, and the NRC was established to focus solely on protecting the public from radioactive materials.
In conclusion, despite the support for nuclear energy and the increasing need for it, the costly and time-consuming mandatory uncontested hearings are seen as unnecessary and detrimental to the progress of nuclear projects. Efforts to eliminate this requirement are being made in Congress, but progress has been slow.
Denial of responsibility! Vigour Times is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
