New Hampshire Going Nuclear? I Hope So.

Despite claims by people who support so-called “green energy” like wind and solar, we’re finding out that neither technology can meet the growing demand. It doesn’t help that both are heavily dependent upon taxpayer money in order to be built and that they never meet the energy demands or provide the return on investment promised by proponents. On top of that, even though these are claimed as “clean and green energy” technologies, we’re finding that they are neither clean or green.

Proponents keep pushing the “energy is free” meme and even though that is true, it is the cost of harnessing that energy that is expensive, something they choose to ignore. If they are cognizant of the actual cost, they downplay it because they can’t have facts contradicting the green energy narrative.

New Hampshire Governor Kelly Ayotte is well versed in the green energy promises and is smart enough to know they don’t work anywhere near as well as proponents claim. She understands that a reliable energy supply is needed for economies to keep operating efficiently. But it seems that over the past couple of decades there has been a war on more traditional energy supplies like natural gas, hydro, and even coal. (New Hampshire has the last operating coal powerplant in New England.) When the governor of a neighboring state, Massachusetts, worked hard to kill not one, but two new pipelines that would bring much needed natural gas into New England, and then complained when there was a natural gas shortage last winter, you know the leadership needed to ensure adequate electricity supplies is lacking, or worse, they are bought and paid for by the green energy true believers. (It’s gotten so bad that not one, not two, but three powerline projects that would have brought clean, renewable, and inexpensive hydropower into New England were killed off by the same people who then complain about their ever rising electricity bills.)

This is where Governor Ayotte differs from the governors in the other New England states, something that become evident during her recent State Of The State address back on February 5th:

Which brings me to an area of our lives here in New Hampshire that is not where we want it to be – and that is our electric rates. Let’s understand why we are here: Our neighbors, that govern a lot differently than we do, are busy pushing up regional rates with their net zero religion, and lack of pragmatism and consideration for the consumer.

While at the same time they are battling to block new energy projects that would lower costs for all of us by delivering much-needed energy into our region, such as the Constitution pipeline.

Here at home, our Public Utilities Commission has been too willing to go along with the wishes of the big utilities boosting their bottom line instead of being focused on keeping rates as low as possible for the residents of our state. The Commission must provide transparency to residents when it comes to their electric bills and put the needs of ratepayers first.

Looking toward the future of energy in New Hampshire, we can build on the successes of our homegrown power. There are numerous groups, lawmakers and stakeholders looking into the next steps of Nuclear. Today, I am directing our Department of Energy to build pathways to foster the next generation of nuclear power generation here in New Hampshire. I have asked the Department to bring together stakeholders, lawmakers and organizations focused on nuclear generation to ensure our state is at the forefront of this pivotal technology.

She understands that our future when it comes to electricity is going to be nuclear. Whether people want to admit it or not, nuclear power can be a lot cleaner and greener than what we have been told over the past 50 years or so. Too many of those against a nuclear renaissance are stuck back in the 70’s and 80’s when it comes to nuclear technology. Modern Generation III and Generation IV reactors are safer, more efficient, easier and less expensive to construct via Small Modular Reactor (SMR) designs, and some of the new reactor designs can use ‘depleted’ nuclear fuel from Generation II reactors for fuel, eliminating the need to store long half-life depleted fuel for 25,000 years or more. What’s not to like?

I have heard some people who are against nuclear power make the claim that we have no experience with modern technology, particularly SMRs, that it’s all still just theoretical. I beg to differ as there is plenty of experience with the newer nuclear reactor technology. Who has experience with that technology, you may ask? One of the largest users of nuclear power in the world: The United States Navy.

Between nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and nuclear-powered submarines, there is plenty of experience with the technology. The Virginia-class nuclear submarines employ an advanced Generation IV reactor, and I have no doubt the new Columbia-class submarines will do so as well.

Nuclear powerplants run 24/7/365, and the newer Generation III and IV powerplants will be able to run for even longer as some of the designs do not need to be taken offline for refueling like the old Generation II plants.

I have a feeling I’ll need to dig into this technology a bit deeper as I don’t want a topic like this to be dismissed because “It’s just his opinion. What does he know about the technology?”