SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
This undated Department of Energy photo shows the Alvin W. Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, also known as Plant Vogtle, in Waynesboro, Georgia.
(Photo: U.S. Department of Energy)
Scientists Say Senate Bill Will Endanger People 'Living Downwind' of Nuclear Plants
"This is not about making the reactor licensing process more efficient, but about weakening safety and security oversight across the board, a long-standing industry goal," says one nuclear safety expert.
Jun 17, 2024
As U.S. senators prepare to vote on a bipartisan bill proponents say will accelerate the development and commercialization of advanced nuclear reactor technologies, the Union of Concerned Scientists warned Monday that the legislation would increase the chances of a "catastrophic" meltdown by weakening the Nuclear Regulatory Commission—an agency already ridden by conflicts of interest.
Upper chamber lawmakers are expected to vote this week on a package that includes provisions from the Accelerating Deployment of Versatile, Advanced Nuclear for Clean Energy (ADVANCE) Act, introduced last year by Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), and legislation passed by the House of Representatives in a 365-36 vote on February 28.
Proponents of the legislation argue it will facilitate U.S. nuclear leadership, develop and deploy new reactor technology, preserve existing nuclear energy, and more.
"A compromised NRC could lead to a catastrophic reactor meltdown impacting an entire region for a generation."
However, critics including the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) argue that the bill threatens the independence of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), some of whose officials have long been criticized for their dangerously close ties to the industry they regulate. Additionally, NRC advisers have been accused of undisclosed conflicts of interest.
"It's extremely disappointing that, without any meaningful debate, Congress is about to erase 50 years of independent nuclear safety oversight by changing the NRC's mission to not only protect public health and safety but also to protect the financial health of the industry and its investors," UCS director of nuclear power safety Edwin Lyman said in a statement Monday.
"Just as lax regulation by the [Federal Aviation Administration]—an agency already burdened by conflicts of interests—can lead to a catastrophic failure of an aircraft, a compromised NRC could lead to a catastrophic reactor meltdown impacting an entire region for a generation," he continued.
"Make no mistake: This is not about making the reactor licensing process more efficient, but about weakening safety and security oversight across the board, a long-standing industry goal," Lyman contended. "The change to the NRC's mission effectively directs the agency to enforce only the bare minimum level of regulation at every facility it oversees across the United States."
"Passage of this legislation will only increase the danger to people already living downwind of nuclear facilities from a severe accident or terrorist attack, and it will make it even more difficult for communities to prevent risky, experimental reactors from being sited in their midst," he added.
In a February opinion piece published by The Hill, Lyman asserted that the ADVANCE Act would "put the proverbial fox in charge of the henhouse" by eroding the independence of an agency that critics say is already too cozy with the nuclear industry.
"Congress needs to strengthen, rather than weaken, the NRC's science-based safety focus," Lyman stressed.
This post has been updated to clarify that the Senate and House bills are part of a broader package, which senators ultimately passed on June 18.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
energyu.s. senatenuclear powerunion of concerned scientistsnuclear regulatory commissionshelley moore capito
As U.S. senators prepare to vote on a bipartisan bill proponents say will accelerate the development and commercialization of advanced nuclear reactor technologies, the Union of Concerned Scientists warned Monday that the legislation would increase the chances of a "catastrophic" meltdown by weakening the Nuclear Regulatory Commission—an agency already ridden by conflicts of interest.
Upper chamber lawmakers are expected to vote this week on a package that includes provisions from the Accelerating Deployment of Versatile, Advanced Nuclear for Clean Energy (ADVANCE) Act, introduced last year by Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), and legislation passed by the House of Representatives in a 365-36 vote on February 28.
Proponents of the legislation argue it will facilitate U.S. nuclear leadership, develop and deploy new reactor technology, preserve existing nuclear energy, and more.
"A compromised NRC could lead to a catastrophic reactor meltdown impacting an entire region for a generation."
However, critics including the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) argue that the bill threatens the independence of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), some of whose officials have long been criticized for their dangerously close ties to the industry they regulate. Additionally, NRC advisers have been accused of undisclosed conflicts of interest.
"It's extremely disappointing that, without any meaningful debate, Congress is about to erase 50 years of independent nuclear safety oversight by changing the NRC's mission to not only protect public health and safety but also to protect the financial health of the industry and its investors," UCS director of nuclear power safety Edwin Lyman said in a statement Monday.
"Just as lax regulation by the [Federal Aviation Administration]—an agency already burdened by conflicts of interests—can lead to a catastrophic failure of an aircraft, a compromised NRC could lead to a catastrophic reactor meltdown impacting an entire region for a generation," he continued.
"Make no mistake: This is not about making the reactor licensing process more efficient, but about weakening safety and security oversight across the board, a long-standing industry goal," Lyman contended. "The change to the NRC's mission effectively directs the agency to enforce only the bare minimum level of regulation at every facility it oversees across the United States."
"Passage of this legislation will only increase the danger to people already living downwind of nuclear facilities from a severe accident or terrorist attack, and it will make it even more difficult for communities to prevent risky, experimental reactors from being sited in their midst," he added.
In a February opinion piece published by The Hill, Lyman asserted that the ADVANCE Act would "put the proverbial fox in charge of the henhouse" by eroding the independence of an agency that critics say is already too cozy with the nuclear industry.
"Congress needs to strengthen, rather than weaken, the NRC's science-based safety focus," Lyman stressed.
This post has been updated to clarify that the Senate and House bills are part of a broader package, which senators ultimately passed on June 18.
From Your Site Articles
- US NRC Seeks Greatly Reduced Safety Regulations for 'Advanced' Nuclear Power Plants ›
- What the Pro-Nuclear Bros Don’t Want You to Know About Their Mini Reactors ›
- I Oversaw the US Nuclear Power Industry. Now I Think It Should Be Banned. ›
- 88-2: Only Markey, Sanders Oppose 'Expensive, Risky' Nuclear Power Expansion | Common Dreams ›
As U.S. senators prepare to vote on a bipartisan bill proponents say will accelerate the development and commercialization of advanced nuclear reactor technologies, the Union of Concerned Scientists warned Monday that the legislation would increase the chances of a "catastrophic" meltdown by weakening the Nuclear Regulatory Commission—an agency already ridden by conflicts of interest.
Upper chamber lawmakers are expected to vote this week on a package that includes provisions from the Accelerating Deployment of Versatile, Advanced Nuclear for Clean Energy (ADVANCE) Act, introduced last year by Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), and legislation passed by the House of Representatives in a 365-36 vote on February 28.
Proponents of the legislation argue it will facilitate U.S. nuclear leadership, develop and deploy new reactor technology, preserve existing nuclear energy, and more.
"A compromised NRC could lead to a catastrophic reactor meltdown impacting an entire region for a generation."
However, critics including the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) argue that the bill threatens the independence of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), some of whose officials have long been criticized for their dangerously close ties to the industry they regulate. Additionally, NRC advisers have been accused of undisclosed conflicts of interest.
"It's extremely disappointing that, without any meaningful debate, Congress is about to erase 50 years of independent nuclear safety oversight by changing the NRC's mission to not only protect public health and safety but also to protect the financial health of the industry and its investors," UCS director of nuclear power safety Edwin Lyman said in a statement Monday.
"Just as lax regulation by the [Federal Aviation Administration]—an agency already burdened by conflicts of interests—can lead to a catastrophic failure of an aircraft, a compromised NRC could lead to a catastrophic reactor meltdown impacting an entire region for a generation," he continued.
"Make no mistake: This is not about making the reactor licensing process more efficient, but about weakening safety and security oversight across the board, a long-standing industry goal," Lyman contended. "The change to the NRC's mission effectively directs the agency to enforce only the bare minimum level of regulation at every facility it oversees across the United States."
"Passage of this legislation will only increase the danger to people already living downwind of nuclear facilities from a severe accident or terrorist attack, and it will make it even more difficult for communities to prevent risky, experimental reactors from being sited in their midst," he added.
In a February opinion piece published by The Hill, Lyman asserted that the ADVANCE Act would "put the proverbial fox in charge of the henhouse" by eroding the independence of an agency that critics say is already too cozy with the nuclear industry.
"Congress needs to strengthen, rather than weaken, the NRC's science-based safety focus," Lyman stressed.
This post has been updated to clarify that the Senate and House bills are part of a broader package, which senators ultimately passed on June 18.
From Your Site Articles
- US NRC Seeks Greatly Reduced Safety Regulations for 'Advanced' Nuclear Power Plants ›
- What the Pro-Nuclear Bros Don’t Want You to Know About Their Mini Reactors ›
- I Oversaw the US Nuclear Power Industry. Now I Think It Should Be Banned. ›
- 88-2: Only Markey, Sanders Oppose 'Expensive, Risky' Nuclear Power Expansion | Common Dreams ›
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.