Last month, the House Committee on Science and Technology held a hearing on nuclear fuel reprocessing. The hearing covered a range of topics relating to nuclear waste and reprocessing including time tables on various projects, costs, issues of safety, and discussions on the future of the technology.

The Committee heard testimony from Dr. Mark Peters, Deputy Associate Laboratory Director of Argonne National Laboratory, Dr. Alan S. Hanson, Executive Vice President for Technology and Used Fuel Management at Areva, Inc., Ms. Lisa Price, Senior Vice President of GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy and Chief Executive Officer of Global Nuclear Fuel, and Dr. Charles D. Ferguson, the Philip D. Reed Senior Fellow for Science and Technology at the Council on Foreign Relations.

The hearing addressed whether existing reprocessing technologies should be utilized and further developed or if the country’s focus should be on next generation reprocessing technologies, as mentioned by Chairman Gordon (D-TN) in his opening statement. Witnesses, while emphasizing the need for more research and development of reprocessing technologies, seemed anxious to move ahead with next generation technologies such as a Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP). The NGNP is one of the newer technologies being discussed at Department of Energy and focuses on high temperature reactors technologies.

Several committee members, including Rep. Edwards (D-MD) and Rep. Woolsey (D-CA), raised cost concerns and questioned if reprocessing was worth the investment. Rep. Baird also contributed to the cost discussion with questions regarding government subsidies to the industry. In response, Dr. Peters from Argonne National Lab highlighted the huge subsidies that have gone into the industry, stating that past subsidies for research and development were approximately $300 million a year. Dr. Ferguson, of the Council on Foreign Relations, added that the uncertainty of costs for the construction of new reactors further emphasized economic concerns.

Issues with the transportation of nuclear waste and safety concerns were also mentioned. Rep. Bilbray (R-CA) expressed his strong opinion that issues surrounding the safety of transporting nuclear waste are used as a way to prevent progress in the nuclear industry. To demonstrate the safety of nuclear power, Dr. Hanson mentioned the deaths associated with wind mills.

With Secretary Chu’s declaration that the nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain is no longer on the table and the Administration’s request to cease funding for the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, a large-scale international reprocessing initiative, the debate in Congress on nuclear waste is sure to continue. Furthermore, reprocessing has already played a role in this year’s energy and climate bills. As Congress completes work on major legislation, the battle for increased subsidies seems all too certain. To address this, TCS will continue our work reporting the costs and risks of subsidizing the reprocessing technologies.

Members participating in the Hearing include Rep. Gordon (D-TN), Rep. Ehlers (R-MI), Rep. Edwards (D-MD), Rep. Rohrabacher (R-CA), Rep. Lujan (D-NM ), Rep. Biggert (R-IL), Rep. Kosmas (D-FL), Rep. Bilbray (R-CA), Rep. Woolsey (D-CA), Rep. Hall (R-TX), Rep. Baird (D-WA), and Rep. Inglis (R-SC).