Iowa Legislators are Enthusiastic about Nuclear Power
by Paul DeatonLate Wednesday night, word came from a friend in Des Moines that MidAmerican Energy has the votes to get the legislature to enthusiastically declare that Iowa is open for business on nuclear energy. Emphasis on “enthusiastically.”
Those of us following the issue of how Iowa will source its electricity, and maybe make enough to sell outside the state, are not surprised that HSB 124 and SSB 1144 are gaining traction in a divided government. There is no question that Governor Branstad would sign such a bill, if the legislature approves, as he is in the business of declaring “Iowa is open for business” in any way he can. The enthusiasm for nuclear power in the legislature is a result of an imbalance between the asserted “experts” (aka powerful interests) like MidAmerican Energy, the Rural Electric Cooperatives and Alliant Energy and the more pragmatic among us who view electricity production in the broader context of life in the 21st century.
As Blog for Iowa pointed out last week, electricity is cheap in Iowa, 13-1/2 cents per kilowatt hour where the author lives. The trouble with nuclear power is that under the current rate-making procedures, building a new nuclear power generating station is not economically viable. HSB 124/SSB 1144 would fix that, creating a mechanism where a public utility can recover all of its costs and make a profit in building and operating a nuclear power generating station. That means, what the Federal and State Government don't pay would be passed along to customers.
If we recall the Iowa Utilities Board determination about how much profit the proposed coal fired power plant in Marshalltown could make, the board made a lower determination on return on investment percentage than proposed by the electric utility. It was a determining factor in the utility's decision to end the project without building.
Now that public utilities have been deregulated, it is reasonable for them to make a profit, and some tinkering with the code may be necessary as we increase our knowledge about electricity generation and the hidden costs from environmental degradation, water usage, and hazards to human health.
Why are Iowa's legislators so enthusiastic about nuclear power? We have created a functional meritocracy around the generation of electricity, in which the power to influence the legislators goes to those with the most knowledge about it, the electric utilities.
MidAmerican Energy, a company coming to renewable energy late in the game, is scrambling to prevent a disaster caused by management decisions to focus almost all of their electricity generating capacity in burning coal. They have begun to build wind farms, but the CO2, other emissions and coal ash from their coal power generating capacity are problematic for the survival of the planet and for them and they know it. In an effort to solve the problem they made for themselves, they are embracing nuclear energy as a big solution and are persuading legislators of as much, hook, line and sinker.
The problem for citizens is that there are substantial environmental concerns with building and operating a nuclear power generating station. Primary among these concerns is whether the regulations are adequate to protect human life. With the Environmental Impact Statement being prepared by the entity applying for a license, they usually meet the Nuclear Regulatory Commission requirements, but fall short of adequately protecting the environment and the people who live in it. There is no identified path to fixing this conflict of interest.
While less gaseous and particulate emissions are produced once a nuclear plant comes on line, unrecognized environmental degradation occurs in the form of mining and processing of uranium, making the concrete for the plant, in water usage and in the release of tritium and its impact on human health. Nuclear power may reduce coal and natural gas emissions caused by burning these fuels, but new problems are created and may currently be unrecognized, requiring future regulation at a higher cost to customers. Nuclear power also makes Iowa dependent on other market factors, states and countries for fuel.
The better question for Iowa legislators to ask as they consider HSB 124/SSB 1144 is whether Iowa can achieve energy independence without nuclear power and relegate the notion of “baseload” electricity to the ash heaps of the 20th century where it belongs. There are other, cost effective ways to make and use electricity. Regrettably, blind enthusiasm prevents legislators from seeing this is possible and that it may be a better path to create jobs and meet our demand for electricity. ~Paul Deaton is a native Iowan living in rural Johnson County and weekend editor of Blog for Iowa. E-mail Paul Deaton
****ACTION ALERT****
Click here to find your legislator. Ask them to vote no on HSB 124/SSB 1144.
Blog For Iowa 
I became very interested in alternate energy in the 1970’s when this country should have gotten its ‘wake up’ call on future energy.
In my opinion it is a crime that anyone in Iowa is considering nuclear power and the citizens of the state need to know who they are so that they can be voted out of office! The state of Iowa has hundreds of megawatts of potential hydro power at existing dams!! First there is the dams constructed for flood control at Red Rock, Sailorville, and Rathbun that have never generated a watt of power but are perfectly capable of doing so. Then there are the 80 or so low head dams scattered around the state many of which were built to be municiple hydro electric dams. Most of these genreated power into the 1960’s when they were shut down by the energy monopolies! Nearly all had intact machinery till the PURPA act of 1978 was passed that allowed private indiviuals to genrerate power and forced utilities to buy it. Then it seemed overnight they all had their machinery scrapped. Coincidence????? Now there seems to be a pressure to take out dams at tax payer expense. So that introduced Asian jumping carp can get up river easier????? If the legislature thinks it should be able to charge whatever it wants to afford a nuclear power plant then how about private electric producers being able to do the same. Nuclear power won’t quite pay just as methane digesters on Iowa hoghouses or solar power or small hydro won’t quite pay. The American tax payer is’nt spending billions on them like it is to store the 70,000 tons of nuclear waste in the country. Nor are they being forced to accept all liability for a nuclear accident as the Price/ Anderson act has forced them to do. Course since there is no insurance underwriter in the world willing to insure a nuclear power plant I guess we would have to shut them all down without the taxpayer getting stuck for the risk!
Kurt.
LikeLike
Kurt:
Thanks for commenting on Blog for Iowa. Since I wrote this post a year ago, the enthusiasm among legislators has waned a bit. As your comment suggests, education is key to doing something sensible with regard to Iowa’s energy future. As legislators have learned more about nuclear power and financing it, the bill HF 561 has fallen into the background. We’ll see if it survives the second funnel. If you live in Iowa, now would be a good time to contact your State Senator.
Thanks again for commenting and for reading Blog for Iowa.
Regards, Paul
LikeLike