The public comment period ends Monday on a federal ruling that could boost a plan to keep the Point Beach Nuclear Plant operating into the 2050s. Critics have several concerns, including what climate change may do to the plant north of Manitowoc that generates about 15% of Wisconsin’s electricity.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or NRC, has spent about five years looking at the plan to extend the license of the two reactors at Point Beach another two decades beyond their current expiration dates of 2030 and 2033. That would push the age of the plant along Lake Michigan to about 80.
Recently, in a revised draft of a supplemental environmental impact statement, commission staff issued a preliminary conclusion that there are no adverse environmental impacts that would preclude renewing the licenses.
That finding troubles Alfred Meyer, who’s on the steering committee of Physicians for Social Responsibility-Wisconsin. Meyer says one of his key concerns is that weather conditions are changing, and are predicted to keep doing so as more greenhouse gases go into the atmosphere.
“And what I worry about is instead of looking forward to see what might be coming, our regulators are really looking in the rearview mirror and talking about rainfall levels in 1901 and 1895. It seems ridiculous," he says.
Meyer says there could be a huge rainstorm that would cause erosion on the lake bluff at Point Beach. Plus, the risk of more frequent tornadoes. He says the GAO, or Government Accountability Office, told the NRC last year that it isn’t fully considering the risks related to climate change.
Florida-based Next Era Energy, which owns Point Beach and sells the generated electricity to We Energies, did not comment for this story. But the Nuclear Energy Institute, the trade association for nuclear plant operators, says the plants are robust structures. The NEI’s Brett Titus says the license holders are required to analyze information about natural hazards.
“And if there is any new credible information that comes through the scientific community, our licensees have to address that in a timely basis, consistent with the regulatory requirements there," he says.
Climate and weather are also on the mind of Amy Schulz, a retired nurse and president of Physicians for Social Responsibility-Wisconsin. She says the U.S. government and nuclear industry still haven’t solved the long-tern problem of storing the highly radioactive waste generated at plants like Point Beach. Around the nation, Schulz says, the spent uranium fuel stays in in-plant pools of water, or outside in concrete and steel casks.
“And they are vulnerable to weather events, as well as catastrophic events, whether it be through a terrorist attack or a nuclear accident," she says.
In response, the Nuclear Energy Institute’s Brett Titus says, “Right now, it’s in the safest configuration it can be. Both within the pools and especially when it gets out into dry casks."
Titus acknowledges a long-term storage solution is still a ways off. He says the U.S. Energy Department is working to find a national or regional location that wants the waste. Occasionally, a Midwest site gets mentioned, but more often sites in Texas or New Mexico.
Beyond the storms and waste issues, the critics of license extensions say they continue to worry that key parts of older plants like Point Beach are wearing out or becoming brittle — just like a lot of things 50 years old and with hopes of being active until 80.
The industry responds that licensees have aging management programs to keep things running.
Across the U.S., 12 nuclear reactors have been approved to keep going until 80. The Point Beach review comes as President DonaldTrump has signed executive orders aimed at speeding up the approval of new reactors, including smaller, advanced ones, now getting an early look for several locations, including possible placement at the shut down Kewaunee Nuclear Plant.
The NEI’s Titus says he’s generally encouraged. “All these policies are generally there to strengthen and bolster national security and meet the energy goals.”
But a former Nuclear Regulatory Commission chairman says Trump’s policies are like holding a guillotine to the nation’s nuclear safety system — that will make the country less safe and industry less reliable.
