Subscribe today to the Washington Examiner magazine and get Washington Briefing: politics and policy stories that will keep you up to date with what’s going on in Washington. SUBSCRIBE NOW: Just $1.00 an issue!
REPORTING FROM THE SCREENING OF STONE’S NUCLEAR DOCUMENTARY: Nuclear Now, Oliver Stone’s new documentary, asks viewers to “embrace the primordial power in the nucleus of the atom” to slow climate change and meet humanity’s growing energy needs.
The famed director’s movie, which he said was born out of worry over climate change and his annoyance at the “confusion” in public debates around how best to reduce emissions, is an extended apology for atomic energy of the sort you can see going on everyday from pro-nuclear accounts that populate “energy Twitter.”
It addresses all the lasting storylines in the history of nuclear energy: The destructive use of fission and the “original sin” of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, how Chernobyl and Three Mile Island shaped impressions of nuclear energy’s danger in power generation applications, and the proliferation of anti-nuclear sentiment and celebrity-led activism against nuclear power’s expansion in the 1970s.
The Cliffs Notes of the movie is: Nuclear is safe and clean (resoundingly so relative to burning coal) and where governments or interest groups still oppose nuclear power, it’s because they’ve been miseducated about its pros and cons.
“You have to know what nuclear energy is first, which, a lot of people don’t know what it is,” Stone said last night after a private screening in Washington. “And you have to know its power and its magic. You have to pay homage to this.”
Other key themes and arguments the film makes:
- The lack of permanent storage for spent nuclear fuel in the United States (not a fundamental problem to nuclear, which is the Biden administration’s position, too)
- Land use and nuclear in competition with clean renewable energy, an issue that arose this morning between Sen. Jim Risch and Interior Secretary Deb Haaland on the Lava Ridge Wind project in Idaho (nuclear wins, Stone says)
Some commentary for today: Support for nuclear power has emerged as one of a few lasting bipartisan issues, something author Joshua Goldstein, who worked with Stone and whose pro-nuclear 2019 book A Bright Future inspired the project, pointed out in remarks alongside Stone following last night’s showing.
President Joe Biden has signed off on legislation increasing funding for research and development of next-generation reactor technologies and subsidizing the life of legacy plants, and Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm is a big proponent.
“The Biden administration has been very strong on it. So was the Trump administration. Jennifer Granholm has been fantastic. So was Rick Perry,” Goldstein said.
Stone said he wants to see more vocal support for a buildout of new nuclear from Biden himself and said it could be a “World War II”-type industrial effort.
Where the public is: Gallup released results of a new poll last week which found support for nuclear power among the public at its highest point in a decade: 55% favor nuclear as a power generation source, while 44% oppose it.
Some U.S. allies, including Germany and Austria, have taken strong positions against nuclear and phased it out — another subject addressed in the movie. Other countries such as Romania and Poland are entering new partnerships with U.S. nuclear companies and the U.S. government to expand nuclear power.
Opposition remains strong among some interest groups, including Friends of the Earth (whose history is yet another subject of the film), which sued PG&E last month to block an extension of the life of Diablo Canyon in California, while others are backing nuclear on environmental grounds.
“If we want to build a clean energy future, nuclear energy must be at the heart of our strategy, and we can no longer afford for unfounded fears and misconceptions to stand in our way,” said Chris Barnard, VP of external affairs for the American Conservation Coalition, who called Stone’s movie an example of nuclear energy’s growing momentum.
Welcome to Daily on Energy, written by Washington Examiner Energy and Environment Writers Jeremy Beaman (@jeremywbeaman) and Breanne Deppisch (@breanne_dep). Email [email protected] or [email protected] for tips, suggestions, calendar items, and anything else. If a friend sent this to you and you’d like to sign up, click here. If signing up doesn’t work, shoot us an email, and we’ll add you to our list.
MANCHIN BRINGS PERMITTING BILL BACK WITHOUT CHANGES: Sen. Joe Manchin reintroduced his permitting reform bill this morning, which failed to pass in December despite receiving bipartisan support and Biden’s endorsement.
The legislation, which his office called a “starting point” for the Senate’s permitting reform conversation, includes the same text as his Building American Energy Security Act, itself an edited version of the initial permitting reform proposal Manchin first introduced in September pursuant to his deal with Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.
The high points: Mountain Valley Pipeline approval, a firm 150-day statute of limitations for litigation against agency actions such as records of decision, and 25 high-priority energy project designations by the president.
Setting the tone: Manchin expressed his intention to bring the bill back a few weeks ago and later announced a permitting reform work period to coincide with the slate of Energy and Natural Resources hearings, including last week’s hearing featuring Secretary Jennifer Granholm and today’s with Interior Secretary Deb Haaland.
Permitting reform will also be on the agenda Thursday when FERC’s commissioners appear before ENR, their first visit back before the committee since March of last year, when a livid Manchin called then-Chairman Richard Glick and his colleagues to answer to the commission’s revised policy statements foregrounding climate change considerations in certificate reviews.
What else is on the table: Manchin’s legislation is now one among several bill texts floating around the halls of Congress containing proposed reforms to speed project approval and construction, including Republicans’ HR 1 and a new discussion draft from House Democrats’ Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition, which SEEC released last week.
OIL AND GAS LOBBIES PUSH SENATE FOR PERMITTING REFORM: Leading oil and gas trade groups are re-upping their request for reforms to NEPA and other laws to make construction of pipelines and related infrastructure easier, setting up the next phase in the lobbying battle between themselves and environmental interests and many Democrats who are standing against giving more ground (literally and figuratively) to the sector.
A big concern for the Interstate Natural Gas Association in particular, which wrote to E&E committee leadership in the Senate yesterday alongside API and other trade groups, has been Clean Water Act certifications, the issuance of which states participate in directly under Section 401 of the law.
A deficient 401 certification from West Virginia is the latest hurdle holding up the MVP.
OOPS: Interior Secretary Deb Haaland appeared to be unaware of the Biden administration’s timeline for offshore wind projects during her testimony today before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.
Asked by Sen. Martin Heinrich of New Mexico when the first utility-scale offshore wind projects would be permitted, Haaland declined to answer, saying instead that she would have her staff follow up. “Senator, if it’s okay, our staff will get back with you,” she said.
(There are currently two utility-scale projects under construction in the U.S., Vineyard Wind off of Massachusetts, and South Fork Wind, off of New York.)
Watch the exchange and the rest of Haaland’s testimony here
The Rundown
Bloomberg America’s nuclear waste capital wants more of it, against state wishes
Reuters India, China propose ‘multiple pathways’ on cutting use of fossil fuels-sources
