Can We Talk?
US Nuclear Energy Foundation
Our mission is to influence change in public opinion towards
“Our freedoms can only
January 15, 2007
State of Nevada
This section of the video record commences at the 11:15 AM tape segment. Having ordered and reviewed this legislative video record I was amazed at this testimony, stating that the majority of Nevada’s legal and scientific research opposition to the DOE’s studies of the Yucca Mountain Project are being secured out of state and out of the country. We can only hope that Nevada’s China contract for corrosion study science is not the same group of companies who manufacture toys! The statements below are exact quotes from the state video record of this legislative committee meeting. Gary J. Duarte, Director, US Nuclear Energy.
Committee member question to Nevada Director of Nuclear Projects, Mr. Bob Loux . . . Can you tell me to what extent to which you can find law firms capable of sorting out the things you need (tape file change) and find scientific and technical contractors who are able to meet your needs or does this have to be contracted beyond our state boundaries? “Well, aah . . . let me deal with the lawyer question first”.
“The practice before the NRC is a very specialized and unique practice. There are no firms that I’m aware of, or individuals in the State of Nevada that have that expertise who have practiced before the NRC before. Primarily these firms are in Washington DC or New York as the case may be and there are a limited number of them aah, not only because of the practice but many of them are representing utilities in lawsuits against DOE, DOE has two very large law firms themselves under contract currently to help them” . . .
“As relating to the scientists and some experts, you might recall that many years ago we had sort of an informal agreement with the Department of Energy that the University System for the State of Nevada would sort of be a resource to the State and that DOE would look for their expertise somewhat out of the state and this was long before Ward’s tenure. That agreement, informally was sort of violated by DOE in that they wanted to capture some of the scientists at UNR and UNLV and did so and we simply with the funds we had, many of these researches had to choose which of the other, we certainly couldn’t share them in that many of the research results and data would be used by us to oppose the license or vice versa, ahh in so ahh we suspect the DOE also wanted to do that for other reasons other than simply the technical expertise to essentially ahh engrain themselves a little bit into the research departments of these universities and so aah we’ve been forced to find expertise elsewhere, it’s been difficult to find ahh scientists in these particular fields that aren’t somehow affiliated with DOE or some other DOE contractors although we have found many who aren’t and we have been looking to and have engaged several, many scientists in the UK for example ahh and other places throughout the world for example we’re doing some of our corrosion work in China ahh simply because the resources aren’t available to us in the United States or if they are there much more expensive than we can afford and we have found the expertise in particular, many of the scientists that we have engaged in the UK to be very very high quality, very familiar with the department of energy’s program ahh looking at it from afar, and have provided a great deal service to us and will continue to do so, so that’s principally where we’ve had to go ahh because of these circumstances”.
END of Mr. Loux testimony.
The Yucca Mountain Project has been opposed by the State of Nevada for around 20 years, PRIMARIALY for “political” and not scientific reasons. Another travesty of truth in this 20 year escapade is that the politics have pelted the media with misinformation about nuclear science as has occurred over the past 40 years with all of nuclear energy development, primarily because of its residual nuclear waste. As the science has advanced to solving the major portion of this problem with reprocessing technology, the politics and media haven’t kept up and in most cases have avoided educating the public about this science. This is the reason our citizens are ill informed about Yucca Mountain. The Nevada Commission on Nuclear Projects has been headed by Bob Loux for nearly this 20 year period. (One would think that the state would have this appointment headed by a scientitist . . . Mr. Loux’s degree is in HISTORY). The DOE funds the State of Nevada at about 5 million dollars annually for Nevada to research opposition to the DOE established Yucca Mountain science. Through 20 years of research the MAJORIY of the scientific study SUPPORTS the Yucca Mountain facility as being sound. The majority of the University of Nevada System scientists in this field of study support the Yucca Mountain science. Conversely, this is one of the reasons that the states opposition to Yucca Mountain is seeking research out of the country. Bear in mind that the United States of America and our US companies, GE, Westinghouse, General Dynamics, etc. were the primary innovators of nuclear energy technology starting during President Eisenhower’s administration. The irony here being that opposition to Yucca Mountain science has to be researched offshore?
We would like to clarify that although our focus is nuclear energy, we are 100% supportive of all renewable and green energy alternatives. However, the criteria is that they must be "cost effective"!
The highly discussed topic of Green Energy is going to require a "socioeconomic acceptance", meaning, society will have to accept that the development of wind, solar, etc. will increase your electrical power costs. This is ok for the affluent portion of our society but it will be very difficult for low-income and fixed income people in retirement to manage their ever increasing energy costs!
Statements from our US Nuclear Energy website
They will say, if we build 200 solar farms, the production cost will come down and it will, but if we build 200 new nuclear plants, those costs will come down as well and the "production output" of nuclear energy far exceeds that any other source!
l We started losing our US manufacturing industries in the 80s due to high energy costs (oil embargo) and that trend has been devastating to many “industrial” products moving offshore partially as a result of energy costs. Today, the cost of energy is a world competition not just a US competition. Energy IS the driver of all economies world-wide, we cannot afford to lose this competition! China, Japan, India and Russia are building nuclear power plants as we continue to debate with ourselves . . . if we continue we are going to debate ourselves out of industrial competition!
l Nuclear kilowatts today are sold at about .9 cents per KWH. The best German designed solar systems are “trying” to achieve .22 cents per KWH. Pennies here but billions when they accumulate. We need renewable sources but, we really need to “reduce” our energy costs in order to compete with the “world” energy industrialization. Not only are they out performing us with labor productivity, they are also building nuclear power plants and it's these combinations that are making it very difficult for US to stay competitive.
The State of Nevada is incompetent at providing its citizens with cost effective natural resources, energy and water. 50% of Nevada electrical energy is purchased out of state (and 10% of this is actually via nuclear generation). Natural resources are being tapped from extraordinary sources to sustain our growth. This extension as with renewable energy sources are being called “socioeconomic investments”. (It’s going to cost you much more but it’s the right thing to do!) Today we are living in a cesspool of lies and misrepresentations at every level of existence!
For example, television advertising promoting solar energy in southern Nevada, wind energy in eastern Nevada, geothermal energy throughout Nevada . . . doesn’t this “lead you to believe” that we are doing great with our renewable energy? All of this combined TRULY accounts for less than 10% of Nevada’s energy consumption! Does this display TRUTH in marketing? Or is this “public policy diversion marketing” because 80% of our power comes from coal plants? Let’s go renewable but, let’s be truthful about it. If we want optimum CLEAN power generation efficiency . . . we will GO NUCLEAR! Gary J. Duarte, Director, US Nuclear Energy
A Sincere effort of Major importance to America-Nuclear Energy!