• Oil, Natural Gas, and Electric Deregulation



• Stopping the Nuclear Relapse



• Interactive Map of Proposed New Reactors



• The Case Against Nuclear Power



• The Case for Renewables and Efficiency



• Energy Legislation



• Press Room



• Congressional Voting Records



• Take Action!

Eye on Energy: October 2005

For a PDF version of this newsletter, click here.

Independent Investigation Sought on Yucca’s Falsified Data

Public Citizen, along with 21 other organizations, last month sent a letter to the Senate about the falsified data on the Yucca Mountain Project that surfaced in March 2005. The groups called on lawmakers to immediately halt work on the project, require the Department of Energy to publicly release all relevant information related to the falsification, and convene an independent investigation into the implications of data falsification on DOE's license application. 

“Asking DOE to conduct a sound, reliable investigation of itself is akin to asking the fox to count the hens to make sure none of them have been eaten,” the groups wrote in the letter.

The groups also raised objections to the newly proposed EPA rule on radiation standards for Yucca Mountain, noting that the two-tier proposal would be “setting a standard that drastically weakens radiation protection for future generations.”

Gas Prices, Gas Prices, Gas Prices

Public Citizen’s views on why gas prices are so high are being heard far and wide across the United States. In the month of September, the energy program’s research director, Tyson Slocum, was called to testify on gas and oil prices in both chambers of Congress, as well as before the state of New Jersey. In early October, Tyson testified before the state of Washington.

Private Fuel Storage Approved for Highly Radioactive Waste in Utah  

Public Citizen slammed the recent decision by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to approve a so-called “temporary” high-level radioactive waste storage site, Private Fuel Storage, on Native American land in Utah, calling it a significant mistake, made for all the wrong reasons.

“PFS is an unnecessary, irresponsible and unethical proposal that will do nothing to address the nuclear waste problem this country faces,” said Wenonah Hauter, director of Public Citizen’s energy program.

Despite what has been claimed, PFS will not consolidate waste in one place. As long as we continue to operate nuclear reactors, waste will always remain near cities and communities around the country, because irradiated fuel must be stored on-site for at least five years to allow it to cool before it can be transported. In addition, PFS will mean the transportation of waste through densely populated urban and suburban areas across the country. The project will rush transportation forward and increase the number of times waste is moved. Accidents of some nature are unavoidable.

PFS will also bring risks to Utah. The dump is not planned for permanent storage and will simply place the waste storage containers on concrete pads above ground. There will be no waste repacking facility on-site, as there are presently at reactors, to deal with accidents or problems.

NuStart is a Bad Start

Fresh on the heels of the energy bill being signed into law in August, a consortium of eleven energy companies and nuclear reactor manufacturers is already moving to take advantage of the billions of dollars in subsidies and tax incentives available for the nuclear industry. NuStart Energy Development announced on Sept. 22 that it had narrowed its list of sites at which to apply for a Combined Operating License (COL) from six potential locations to two definite ones.

Selected were the Grand Gulf site in Port Gibson, Miss., and the Bellefonte site in northern Alabama.  The Bellefonte site is owned by the Tennessee Valley Authority, and while construction of several reactors was begun at the site, none were completed or became operational due to high cost.  The work cost $2.5 billion and was stopped in 1988.

Entergy, which owns and operates two reactors at Grand Gulf, has also applied for an Early Site Permit to gain approval for siting new reactors there. Entergy also announced the same day that it would seek a COL for new reactors on its own at its River Bend nuclear plant site in Louisiana. That means there are now seven sites in the South with planned new reactors. The others are Southern Company’s Vogtle plant in Georgia, Dominion’s North Anna in Virginia, and two as-yet unnamed sites in North and South Carolina by Duke and Progress.

The Savannah River Site in South Carolina was under consideration but was not selected for a new reactor.  Calvert Cliffs in Maryland and Nine Mile Point in New York are both owned by Constellation Energy, which recently signed a deal with French reactor manufacturer AREVA and hence withdrew those two sites from consideration.  The final site NuStart considered was River Bend.

The cost of preparing the applications is being split between the U.S. Department of Energy and the NuStart member companies.  Taxpayers will contribute at least $260 million, which is currently enough to prepare two applications and have one reviewed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. NuStart hopes to arrange for the cost of the second review to be partially paid for by taxpayers as well.

QUICK QUOTE

“There are [energy] traders who made so much money this week [after hurricane Katrina], they won't have to punch another ticket for the rest of the year.”

~ Addison Armstrong, manager of exchange traded markets for TFS Energy Futures.

(Source: Dow Jones on Sept.2, 2005.)

DeLay Goes Down

Energy companies with terrible track records were some of the biggest corporate contributors at the heart of the criminal conspiracy and money laundering charges against House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) brought by Travis County, Tx., District Attorney Ronnie Earle in early October.

The district attorney alleges that DeLay conspired with Texans for a Republican Majority Political Action Committee employees to launder corporate contributions to the Republican National Committee in an attempt to circumvent the state’s laws forbidding such contributions to candidates for state office. DeLay was eager to raise the money in order to re-draw the state’s congressional districts to write out six democratic seats, which would allow Republicans to win control of the Texas House for the first time since the 19th century.

Houston-based Reliant Energy made an illegal $25,000 contribution to DeLay’s Texas PAC in 2002. The electric power company has paid $652.5 million to settle allegations that it manipulated energy markets on the West Coast, including shutting down power plants that resulted in power blackouts across California, earning the company huge profits as a result of the energy “shortage.” And Reliant Energy stands as the only energy company involved in the California energy crisis to be criminally indicted for its role in robbing millions of consumers. Reliant Energy - the company, not just executives - goes on trial to face criminal charges on Oct. 31.

Kansas-based Westar Energy also made an illegal $25,000 contribution to DeLay's Texas PAC in 2002. That contribution was the cornerstone of the company’s efforts to “get a seat at the table” of energy bill negotiations led by DeLay at the time. This bribery scandal opened the door to the current criminal investigation of DeLay.

For more information check out Public Citizen's Dethrone Delay campaign.

CORPORATE CORNER

$260 million

What taxpayers will give to NuStart to prepare two and have NRC review one application for new nuclear reactors in the U.S.

more resources

Because Public Citizen does not accept funds from corporations, professional associations or government agencies, we can remain independent and follow the truth wherever it may lead. But that means we depend on the generosity of concerned citizens like you for the resources to fight on behalf of the public interest. If you would like to help us in our fight, click here.