By Katherine Berezowskyj

As part of the audience yesterday during the opening plenary of the American Nuclear Society’s annual conference, I heard speeches from some of the industry’s most prominent leaders, government officials, and distinguished politicians. They spoke of the critical need for new nuclear builds over the next few decades, but never has this message had so much at stake. Facing a global crisis on multiple fronts, they have all come forward to say that while nuclear is not the answer, it must be part of the solution.

America needs nuclear because it will be a domestic energy source that is clean and reliable, and one that can provide thousands of jobs. But these leaders already understand this message and are working right now to develop new projects and legislation for a cleaner, secure energy future. It is now up to Americans really look at our needs, the problems we face and make a decision.

“I do believe that climate change is an issue and we need to deal with carbon in the air…I think the most effective way to do it is to double nuclear production and to do heavy (research and development) on alternative energy.”

– Republican Senator Lamar Alexander, who had just announced with Democratic Senator Webb a plan to issue legislation doubling nuclear power in the US within 20 years and funding research into renewables and recycling of nuclear waste.

Closing the session along with Virginia Senator Jim Webb, Senator Lemar Alexander (Tennessee) had a poignant analogy: if we were going to war, we would not mothball our nuclear navy and start investing in sailboats. (video).

by Jarret Adams

As the U.S. Congress gears up to address climate legislation, it’s hard to know what the best proposal is to address the daunting issue of climate change. There seem to be about as many proposals as there are organizations with a stake in energy and climate issues. But, here in one word is the main reason that nuclear energy matters in this conversation: scale.

Nuclear energy generates 20 percent of America’s electricity but produces 72 percent of our CO2-free electricity. That’s three times more than hydropower, the next largest contributor. According to the Energy Information Administration, the electric power sector is responsible for 40 percent of U.S. emissions of CO2.

Therefore, even a relatively modest increase in the share of nuclear generation would have a major impact on reducing CO2 emissions from the power sector. This also would help move us toward the 80 percent reduction by 2050 that many congressional leaders are discussing.

In fact, the EPA analysis of the Waxman-Markey legislation found in its core scenario that meeting this emissions reduction scenario would require a 150 percent increase in U.S. nuclear generation – this would call for building as many as 180 new reactors by 2050!

Still, we at AREVA don’t believe nuclear energy is the only answer. We are rapidly working to develop new biopower plants through our ADAGE joint venture with Duke Energy. We’re also active in wind power and are scouting new locations for an offshore wind farm in North America using our 5 MW turbines that we are currently installing off the coast of Germany.

Please see below a response from a DOE National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) spokesperson to an innaccurate and misleading new release issued yesterday by an anti-nuclear organization regarding MOX fuel and the MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility under construction at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina. As we have mentioned many times here, AREVA has many satisfied MOX fuel customers around the world and decades of experience in producing safe, efficient MOX fuel assemblies. Here is the NNSA statement:

“The news release issued today by Friends of the Earth is inaccurate and draws incorrect conclusions about the performance of the MOX lead test assemblies and the overall state of the Department’s mixed oxide fuel program at the Savannah River Site.  Shaw AREVA MOX Services and the National Nuclear Security Administration remain steadfast in our commitment to dispose of surplus weapons plutonium in a manner that results in the safe, affordable, and carbon-free generation of electricity for the benefit of American public.  Not only will the fuel produced at the MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility produce enough energy to power one million homes for 50 years, but the disposal of weapon-grade plutonium is a key component of President Obama’s commitment to strengthening international arms control and nonproliferation programs.  In addition, the Department of Energy has evaluated numerous approaches for disposing of surplus weapon-grade plutonium and, simply put, there is no, ‘cheaper, safer and faster alternative.’  This critical project also is important for the Southeastern region of the United States, where it will create jobs and stimulate the local economy.” –NNSA Spokesperson Jennifer Wagner

I support nuclear on its own. But I think it’s one of the key bridges that I can help build to bring people across the bridge to support global warming legislation. I think we are making progress on that….it will be significant if Senator Boxer can bring the bill out of the committee before Copenhagen.

Independent Senator Joe Lieberman, when asked: “Do you gain votes in the climate change bill by adding a strong nuclear provision?”

By Laura Clise
Director, Sustainable Development and Continuous Improvement

In an increasingly resource-constrained world and at a time when society at large is grappling with the critical challenges of economic recovery, energy security, and climate change, business leaders are considering the bold actions required to facilitate the transition to a low-carbon economy. In the globally integrated world in which we live, what happens in one economy does not stay in one economy. Therefore, business, government, and civil society need to establish models of collaboration that address these common issues, which are not limited by national boundaries.

This theme was at the heart of two recent gatherings of the world’s business leaders: a meeting of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) in Washington, D.C., and the Business for Social Responsibility (BSR) conference in San Francisco. As a member of both the WBCSD and BSR, AREVA is fully engaged in this dynamic dialogue about the role business must play in adapting existing business and economic models to support systemic sustainability.

In a panel discussion, incoming WBCSD Chair Jorma Ollila, also Chairman of Royal Dutch Shell and Nokia, emphasized the need to act now in the interest of the long term, managing and addressing the challenges of transition to a low-carbon economy, which will be neither cheap, nor easy, nor quick. In response to the question of the role of climate policy, World Resources Institute President Jonathan Lash and Duke Energy CEO Jim Rogers stressed the importance of a framework that makes it profitable to transition away from old technologies and the need for the U.S. to step up and lead on the issue of climate change.

At the BSR Conference, Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) CEO Ernst Ligteringen argued for the need for strong leadership and a change of mindset that will push companies to balance the pressure to act on short-term targets with a longer-term, sustainable vision. Zhang Yue, Chainman and CEO of BROAD Air Conditioning, raised the question of whether growth (increased production, consumption, etc.) is necessarily development. He encourages his employees to consider why they are selling products to their customers and emphasizes the value of creating products for society using a business model that contributes to a more sustainable economic trajectory.

In a conference breakout session, When Good Intentions Collide, business leaders discussed the challenge of balancing the benefits and drawbacks to various competing technology solutions to economic, energy, and climate change issues. Despite competing policy priorities, the reality is that transformational progress in any of these areas will require a portfolio of solutions and multi-stakeholder collaboration.

To realize the vision of systemic sustainability articulated by both WBCSD President Bjorn Stigson and BSR CEO Aron Cramer, the pursuit of profit must be rooted in sustainable innovation that addresses the critical issues confronting us as a society. Extrapolating from the WBCSD and BSR discussions, more and more, the pathway to profitability will be one that recognizes and respects the limits of the planet while generating both economic and social value – for that is what makes sustainable development both good for business and simply good business.

by Katherine Berezowskyj

Today in the Washington Post, the focus was on the role of nuclear energy in the climate bill.

“The elements of a nuclear package under discussion include investment tax credits, a doubling or more of the existing $18.5 billion in federal loan guarantees for new plants, giving nuclear plants access to a new clean energy development bank, federally financed training for nuclear plant workers, a new look at reprocessing nuclear fuel, and a streamlining of the regulatory approval process, according to corporate, congressional and administration sources.

Designed to put nuclear power on an even footing with wind and solar, the package comes on top of existing incentives, such as the production tax credit…

Even relatively liberal lawmakers such as Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) are talking about the need to insert nuclear power incentives into a climate bill. President Obama has said he is open to new nuclear plants. And Energy Secretary Steven Chu has said that the country should “not stop at three or four, but should get tens of [new] reactors.”

The article also mentions AREVA Newport News, the AREVA and Northrop Grumman $360 million heavy components manufacturing facility currently under construction. Jacques Besnainou, AREVA North America President, was also quoted saying “Nuclear is not the only solution for the U.S., but there’s no solution without nuclear energy.”

However the subject of taxpayer subsidies and federal loan guarantees should have a little more attention. Saying that the industry is “relying on subsidies” is not accurate of the loan guarantee program. Loan guarantees provide a federal backstop so that companies can obtain the financing for developing new projects. According to the Department of Energy, loan guarantees “support early commercial use of advanced technologies, if “there is reasonable prospect of repayment of the principal and interest on the obligation by the borrower.” The program was established to support the development of clean energy technologies, like nuclear energy, especially in the tight capital market.

See the full article, “A Nuclear Power Boost for Bill,” for more discussion of nuclear energy as a part of this key climate legislation.

by Jarret Adams

Today’s Washington Times contains an excellent op-ed piece by John Engler, president of the National Association of Manufacturers and former Michigan governor, on the pending nuclear deal with the United Arab Emirates. Mr. Engler calls on Congress to approve the 123 agreement that would pave the way for the U.A.E. to develop a commercial nuclear power sector, but he cautions that this endorsement should bring some benefit for U.S. industry.

We should expect these steps taken to facilitate the United Arab Emirates program will pay dividends in terms of new jobs and a resurgent nuclear power industry in the United States.

An AREVA-Bechtel consortium is a bidder for the U.A.E. nuclear deal, which calls for up to four reactors and related services. If our bid is selected, we are well positioned to provide plant components from Newport News, Va., enrichment services from Idaho Falls, Idaho, and technological know-how from many locations around the country. And that means more U.S. jobs.

Click here to read the rest of Mr. Engler’s piece.

Democratic Senator John Kerry and Republican Senator Lindsey Graham co-wrote a very important Op-Ed in the New York Times this weekend. You should definitely read the whole thing but some key snippets:

…We refuse to accept the argument that the United States cannot lead the world in addressing global climate change. We are also convinced that we have found both a framework for climate legislation to pass Congress and the blueprint for a clean-energy future that will revitalize our economy, protect current jobs and create new ones, safeguard our national security and reduce pollution….

Our partnership represents a fresh attempt to find consensus that adheres to our core principles and leads to both a climate change solution and energy independence. It begins now, not months from now — with a road to 60 votes in the Senate….

And in language that is similar to our past posts on this blog, they go on to say:

This process requires honest give-and-take and genuine bipartisanship. In that spirit, we have come together to put forward proposals that address legitimate concerns among Democrats and Republicans and the other constituencies with stakes in this legislation. We’re looking for a new beginning, informed by the work of our colleagues and legislation that is already before Congress.

And we certainly applaud their note on the key role nuclear power can have in this new effort:

….while we invest in renewable energy sources like wind and solar, we must also take advantage of nuclear power, our single largest contributor of emissions-free power. Nuclear power needs to be a core component of electricity generation if we are to meet our emission reduction targets. We need to jettison cumbersome regulations that have stalled the construction of nuclear plants in favor of a streamlined permit system that maintains vigorous safeguards while allowing utilities to secure financing for more plants. We must also do more to encourage serious investment in research and development to find solutions to our nuclear waste problem.

And it closes with:

We are confident that a legitimate bipartisan effort can put America back in the lead again and can empower our negotiators to sit down at the table in Copenhagen in December and insist that the rest of the world join us in producing a new international agreement on global warming. That way, we will pass on to future generations a strong economy, a clean environment and an energy-independent nation.

You can read the rest of the op-ed here.

by Lisa Peterson

Who are we?

AREVA subsidiary, AREVA Federal Services, works to support the Department of Energy in projects throughout the United States. Some of the important work going on right now includes nuclear engineering services, such as nuclear waste cleanup activities, nuclear nonproliferation, nuclear energy sciences and radioactive waste services.

AFS came about in 2007 to meet the growing needs of the Department of Energy. As an integral part of AREVA North America, AREVA Federal Services can provide its customers with the best in technologies and services. AREVA Federal Services personnel have been in the business for many, many years and are very experienced in the nuclear energy industry.

A little about what we do:

Nuclear Waste Cleanup
AREVA Federal Services is actively involved in the nuclear waste clean up efforts out at the Hanford site in southeast Washington State. The Hanford site is the largest environmental cleanup project in the U.S. Just last year, we won two contracts to be a major subcontractor to the Tank Operations Contract and to the Plateau Remediation Contract.

The Tank Operations project is for the complex and challenging cleanup of 53 million gallons of residual radioactive and chemical waste stored in 177 large aging underground tanks grouped in 16 farms at the 586 square mile Hanford site. The tank contents include material from the World War II years and post-war production of material for nuclear weapons. AREVA Federal Services is a member of the Office of River Protection LLC, the group responsible for safely managing the waste until it is prepared for disposal.

There is about 2,300 tons of used nuclear fuel, 11.5 tons of plutonium in various forms and 25 million cubic feet of solid waste in the Hanford Plateau. The Plateau Remediation project involves environmental and facility cleanup at the Plutonium Finishing Plant.

Contributing to Nuclear Nonproliferation
Down at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in Aiken, South Carolina Shaw AREVA MOX Services LLC is building a facility to dispose of weapons-grade plutonium. The MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility will take surplus weapons-grade plutonium, remove its impurities and mix it with uranium oxide to form MOX fuel pellets for nuclear fuel reactor assemblies. These assemblies are then used in commercial nuclear power reactors.

Aerial View of MOX Facility Construction

In other words, Shaw AREVA MOX Services LLC, which AREVA Federal Services is a partner in, takes nuclear weapons-grade plutonium and reduces it down to usable fuel to power America.

That’s just a glimpse of what we do. AREVA Federal Services does much more too! The next blog will focus on AREVA Federal Services’ role and experience in nuclear energy sciences and our radioactive waste services. Stay tuned!

by Jarret Adams

After the unveiling of the proposed Boxer-Kerry climate legislation last week, it was politics as usual in Washington, with each side criticizing what it saw as deficiencies in the other side’s position. While the bill includes some excellent measures for helping to combat climate change, its contents do little to recognize the critical role that nuclear energy plays in this effort.

Many Republicans have been vocal about the need to expand nuclear power in the U.S., including leaders such as Sens. John McCain (Ariz.) and Lamar Alexander (Tenn.). Some commentators say that including nuclear provisions in the climate bill would be the best way to gain Republican support necessary for passage in the Senate.

As the fight rages on over health care reform, it appears that bipartisan cooperation on a climate package in the near future could be wishful thinking. In fact, Carol Browner, the White House’s energy advisor, told conference attendees in Washington on Friday that completing a climate bill by December was “not going to happen.”

But finding some common ground on energy and climate issues could be exactly the sort of bipartisan victory the administration needs. There are many issues that remain to be worked out, such as whether a cap-and-trade scheme would be better than a straight up carbon tax, before such an achievement is possible. And differing opinions on the climate bill have lead to some high-profile disputes among some leading companies and organizations in Washington.

As Marc Gunther very incisively observed yesterday on the Energy Collective:

Politically, Obama and the Republicans have a lot to gain by demonstrating that they can work together on climate, even at the risk of losing the far left and the far right. After all, the goal here is not merely a piece of legislation. It’s the transformation of the energy economy. That’s too big a job for any one party to take on alone.

What is clear is that, as the largest CO2-free energy source by far, nuclear energy remains a critical component of addressing U.S. climate issues. In addition, an expansion of nuclear power generation would add to the nation’s energy security and provide many thousands of new jobs.

There also have been some positive signs. As we reported here recently, Energy Secretary Steven Chu has called for an expansion of the nuclear energy loan guarantee program to spur investment in nuclear projects “to avoid the worst of climate change.” We hope others in the Obama Administration are listening.