Legal & Regulatory

If a nuclear revival is to happen, it will depend on understanding the global nature of the supply chains that support it, argues a U.S. conservative think tank.

Does the House Republicans’ alternative to the Democratic energy plan—with the GOP’s proposal for 100 new nuclear plants in the next 20 years—pass the straight-faced test? Not even close, and the GOP knows it.

The bill that the U.S. House passed 219-212 in late June to establish a cap-and-trade regime for control of global warming gases also includes new authority for overriding states on siting power lines. But the new authority only applies to the West.

Everything you want to, or should, know about uranium mining and processing is in a new book by Tom Zoellner, not including the terrifying threat of crocodiles in northern Australia.

Even as hype about the U.S. nuclear renaissance is quieting down—a result of economic woes and unrealistic expectations about political and regulatory developments—some developments remain. As these stories from the nation’s media suggest, the building of new nuclear plants in the U.S. may move ahead at a slower, more measured pace.

There has been much excitement about the advent of the "smart grid" recently, especially because of the strong push by the Obama administration. Despite the simple-sounding term, the smart grid is not a simple concept.

The Obama administration has unveiled its long-awaited policy on cyber security of government and private-sector communication and distribution systems. Is it less than meets the eye, as some critics argue?

The Obama administration has pulled the plug on the Department of Energy’s attempts to develop hydrogen-powered fuel cell cars. (The Bush administration had been touting H-powered cars for many years, with nothing to show for the effort other than large expenditures and a General Motors concept car that cost in the millions to build.) At about the same time, the Obama administration announced it would resurrect the billion-dollar FutureGen coal-fired generating project, aimed for Mattoon, Ill.

As expected, President Obama has named Nuclear Regulatory Commissioner Gregory Jaczko, an ally of Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.), as chairman of the NRC, almost certainly dooming the Yucca Mountain, Nev., site for disposal of spent nuclear fuel.

It’s not easy writing energy legislation, as the experience of the past demonstrates. Nor are the results always in the public interest.

What makes more sense to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from power plants—a cap-and-trade regime or a carbon tax? It’s a contentious issue among those who generate power and among academic economists and policy makers.

A [state utility regulatory] commissioner asked recently, “By what metrics can I assess my commission’s performance?” That’s a tough question.

In the wake of the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling related to cooling water intake practices at large power plants, many utilities are relieved to be off the hook as far as implementing expensive control upgrades to protect fish and other aquatic organisms.

What role will coal play as the nation moves toward trying to reduce greenhouse gases? The picture is mixed, as these news stories from around the country demonstrate.

The Supreme Court backs restrictions on “once-through” cooling for new plants, while giving a pass to existing plants.

Coal continues to demonstrate considerable financial muscle in the current economic downturn, despite anti-coal rhetoric and concerns about climate change.

Could demand from plug-in hybrid cars crash the grid? A DOE national lab addresses the issue.

Working for Uncle Sam can be worthwhile or a life-sapping grind, depending on which agency employs you, according to a new survey by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management. Guess which agency ranked best. (Hint: It’s related to power.)

Does customer satisfaction play a meaningful role in guiding utility operations? Many utilities think it does, as do many regulators. The market apparently doesn’t. Data suggest that the jury is out on the question, and the intuitive answer may not match the empirical evidence.

In the 1990s, alarm bells were sounded because the construction of electric transmission infrastructure was not keeping pace with the United States’ rapidly increasing electric demand. More than 10 years later, despite considerable debate and the passage of new legislation, we continue to search for ways to get transmission built. However, it now looks as if 2009 may the year in which the stars finally align to fix the transmission system.

Nuclear loan guarantees in the 2005 Energy Policy Act have proven to be a failure: not just too little, but far too late.

North Dakota garnered most of the Department of Energy’s earmarks in March’s omnibus appropriations bill.

It’s not easy being a regulator as the nation faces several daunting energy challenges—integrating renewables, carbon constraints, reliability, and security into an elderly grid that is barely able to keep up with its current mission of moving power from generator to load.

President Obama promoted "green energy" as a signature theme in his presidential campaign. During his first weeks, he reaffirmed his administration’s commitment to renewable resources. In a radio address, he promised to double the nation’s alternative energy capacity within three years and to construct a 3,000-mile transmission grid to "convey this new energy from coast to coast."

Power plant managers are familiar with selective catalytic reduction (SCR), a technology to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides from fossil-fueled generating plants. Starting in 2010, SCR technology, using a urea reagent, will also be required on new diesel-powered vehicles in utility fleets, ranging from light-duty pickups to 18-wheelers.

With the U.S. economy currently in a free fall, some utility industry leaders and elected officials argue that carbon cap legislation should be put on hold while the country recovers financially. However, President Barack Obama has a different game plan.

A confluence of circumstances promised to make 2008 a transformative year for renewable energy in the U.S. States enacted additional, and more demanding, renewable portfolio standards, promoting accelerated and sustained development of "green" energy resources. Increasing concerns about global warming and climate change prompted some of this activity. However, the unprecedented escalation of oil prices to almost $150 a barrel (translating into prices at the pump in excess of $4) was the largest impetus for demands that this nation end its addiction to fossil fuels.

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger recently signed an executive order expanding the state’s renewables portfolio standard (RPS) requirement to 33% by 2020. The executive order formalizes what has been generally assumed for some time: A 33% RPS requirement will be needed for California to achieve its ambitious greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction goals.

An attendee at a recent industry conference made the cynical observation that the dysfunctionality of our national and state energy policies can be attributed to the fact that implementation of any program is subject to institutional limitations akin to those imposed by the "Articles of Confederation." Readers may recall that the Articles preceded the Constitution as the governing compact for the 13 original states.

On Sept. 12, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and California Energy Commission (CEC) took the next step in the implementation of Assembly Bill (AB) 32, California’s ambitious greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions – reduction initiative, with the release of a 300-page proposed decision on GHG regulatory strategies.