Latest news with #SenateBills423
Yahoo
16-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Legislators look into nuclear reactors; advocates concerned
ANDERSON — A trio of bills working their way through the Indiana General Assembly are designed to bolster the production and eventual use of small modular reactors, a carbon-free means of generating electricity. But some of the particulars of the legislation are prompting concerns from environmental advocates. House Bill 1007, authored by Rep. Ed Soliday, R-Valparaiso, provides tax credits to manufacturers of small modular reactors, or SMRs. The factory-built form of nuclear reactor is capable of producing at least 300 megawatts of electricity. Two other bills, Senate Bills 423 and 424, would start an SMR pilot program in which utility companies could collaborate with 'eligible partners' to develop SMR sites and allow utility companies to request that the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission shoulder at least some of the project costs. Both bills passed the Senate last week and were set for consideration by the House; HB 1007 passed the House Ways and Means Committee. 'Our goal in this ongoing endeavor is keep Indiana competitive in the national and world marketplace by keeping our five foundational energy pillars — reliability, affordability, resilient, stability and environmental sustainability — in balance,' Soliday, who chairs the House Utilities Committee, told the Indiana Capital Chronicle. Sam Carpenter, executive director of the Hoosier Environmental Council, believes that goal is more of a dream than a reality. SMRs, unlike other forms of clean energy such as wind and solar, are unprecedented, Carpenter said, noting that no utility-based SMR sites are currently in operation in the United States. 'Costs are going to be high for the next 10 to 20 years,' he said. 'We don't think that rate payers should pay for the permitting, the planning, the development costs — which will be possible should these bills pass — associated with unproven technology.' Carpenter's sentiments were echoed in a feasibility study published in 2023 by Purdue University and Duke Energy. One of the study's conclusions was that the lack of sites make estimating costs difficult. The issue of costs is especially worrisome to Carpenter, who noted that several attempts to produce SMRs have been abandoned due to high costs. In 2023, Utah Associated Muncipal Power Systems abandoned its SMR power plant project after costs reached $9.3 billion. Kati Austgen, senior project manager of the new nuclear sector of the Nuclear Energy Institute, noted that costs could be halved through a federal investment tax credit among other funding avenues. SMRs can also be installed in existing facilities like retired coal power plants, though installing the infrastructure could take a number of years. Carpenter fears that the state's latest push will disproportionately impact the average ratepayer. Companies like Tesla or Rolls Royce should be worried about funding SMRs, not the Legislature, he said. Austgen said rate payers will be impacted to some degree or another. 'The ratepayers do (typically) pay a portion of the cost,' she said. Carpenter recommended that Indiana prioritize solar and wind, which he believes are proven and comparatively inexpensive. Austgen suggested a mixed energy portfolio for Indiana. She said multiple studies have shown that the cost of nuclear energy is on par with the cost of renewables, provided that certain conditions are met. 'In order for renewables to be considered firm and available at all times, they have to be paired with battery backup or storage. It needs to be long duration storage,' Austgen said. 'Some of that battery technology, storage technology is also unproven and still in development.' SMRs also raise safety concerns for environmental advocates like Carpenter, who noted that nuclear plants can be prone to meltdowns. Nuclear meltdowns occur when a reactor's fuel rods overheat and eventually become exposed to the open air. These reactors rely on radioactive materials to generate electricity. Such materials, if left in the open, can be harmful to humans. Most nuclear reactors use uranium, a radioactive element associated with diseases such as kidney disease, cancer and, in some cases, birth defects. 'If we have SMRs around Indiana, we have all those targets or potential liabilities,' Carpenter said. Austgen said reactors' safety features have improved and will continue to improve over time, hopefully resulting in fewer accidents. She noted that nuclear sites are of special interest to the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which monitors power plants and makes sure safety requirements are met. 'We (the nuclear industry) ensure that for the health and safety of our employees as well as our communities that we are continuously monitoring and containing any radiation,' Austgen said. 'The public health and safety limits are set such that no one gets any radiation from living near a nuclear power plant.'
Chicago Tribune
14-02-2025
- Business
- Chicago Tribune
Guest column: Stop ratepayer robbery and oppose nuclear reactor bills
In standing-room-only NIPSCO rate case hearings this winter held by the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC), folks came out on blustery evenings and proved a point: Hoosiers cannot afford higher bills. From senior citizens still working full time yet bundled in sweaters and coats in their dark homes to school administrators explaining how another rate hike will eliminate teachers and necessary learning tools, the choices everyday Hoosiers are making are dire. Today, three proposed laws are winding their way through the statehouse, forfeiting what could amount to billions of tax dollars raising our utility prices even higher. House Bill 1007 and Senate Bills 423 and 424 would use Indiana's electric customers as the majority financers of dubious, multibillion-dollar nuclear power schemes called small modular reactors (SMRs). For instance, House Bill 1007 offers tax credits to these companies, taxes that should be used to fund schools and essential services. Clearly, the needs of power-hungry data centers are being prioritized over the needs of our communities. During session hearings, I listened as lawmakers, undeterred in their loyalty to monopoly electric companies and private corporations, repeatedly declared that 'Indiana will lose out, get left behind, forfeit business' if we don't incentivize SMRs, delivered with an urgency that would make a snake oil salesman blush. All three of these bills gut regulatory oversight, allowing utilities to begin charging customers for SMR projects before applying for approval, without ever applying for approval, or even if the project never breaks ground. No worries, though, because, according to an author of SB 423 and 424, ratepayers should rest assured that the IURC will not allow any unreasonable cost requests. This is laughably cold comfort when the IURC has consistently approved utility rate hikes, regardless of heart-wrenching public testimony from consumers begging for relief while our electric companies report significant profits. We cannot ignore the underlying subtext of these bills: they may ultimately delay coal plant retirements and give the IURC authority to deny closures to serve data centers. The coal-burning NIPSCO Michigan City Generating Station (MCGS) is scheduled to shutter in 2028. Still, its fate and the millions of tons of toxic coal ash on the lakefront remain uncertain. Last week's settlement agreement between NIPSCO and LaPorte County commissioners included the prospect of 'a combined cycle gas turbine or gas peaker generating plant or locating battery energy storage systems or other energy technologies at the site.' This legislation could easily exploit this settlement and roll back the MCGS closure and other pending retirements, including the RM Schahfer Generating Station in Wheatfield and beyond. Basic facts should raise common sense suspicions about these bills: there are no operating SMRs in the U.S. today. Even if proven workable, SMRs would take 8-10 years to become operational, while renewable energy options like wind, solar, battery, and geothermal are deployable today. These projects are not cost-effective. For example, NuScale's SMR project, developed for a municipal utility in Utah and Idaho, saw costs balloon to $9.3 billion by 2023, leading the utilities to exit the project. SMRs produce even more waste than a traditional nuclear plant, which is toxic, radioactive, and lasts for thousands of years. This issue could exacerbate the cumulative impact of pollution in already-burdened regions like Northwest Indiana. As we have seen in our area with BP Whiting's recent benzene leak, state agencies fail to provide adequate oversight, enforcement, and emergency communications on industrial incidents and violations. Indiana monopoly utilities and data-driven corporations are acting like schoolyard bullies, with our lawmakers acting as henchmen, taking advantage of our communities, environment, and climate for corporate gain. It is past time to stop state-sanctioned ratepayer robbery and demand a just and equitable transition from fossil fuels. Join us in contacting your legislators and opposing these bills.
