“There is no pristine perfect solution that resolves the dilemma we face, and the dilemma is we have massive demand. . . . There is a role for things like solar and wind, but the key thing for I think folks need to understand is those are intermittent resources, they don’t always work,” he continued.
Con arguments: Spectrum News also quoted Nicholas Breyfogle, a professor of environmental history at The Ohio State University. “There’s been a tremendous shift in terms of how humans are thinking about this as they attempt to deal with climate change. Nuclear power plants produce waste for which we have no [solution], which stays radioactive often for thousands of years. . . . In the United States, we have no central plan for dealing with high-level waste,” he said.
In Breyfogle’s opinion, “Solar and wind and geothermal [are] three options that are out there and ready to go that are much cheaper upfront, much cheaper at the end.” He also recommended energy conservation as an option.
Party politics: The Ohio Capital Journal noted that the bipartisan legislation is sponsored by state representatives Dick Stein, a Republican, and Patrick Brennan, a Democrat. The bill passed the Republican-controlled Ohio House of Representatives this summer, with 10 Democrats voting against it. That House version stirred up controversy by classifying nuclear energy as ”green.”
The Republican-controlled Ohio Senate then added an amendment extending the standard fracking lease on state land from three years to five years. That fracking amendment has served to generate further controversy and debate. Only one Senate Democrat voted for the bill.
Sen. Kent Smith (D., Dist. 21) argued against both the green designation of nuclear and the fracking extension. “This is perhaps the least popular thing that we will do in the entire General Assembly. Why are we extending the lease in this amendment again without public consideration? . . . This bill would designate nuclear energy as green energy, which is kind of mystifying to me, because it’s clearly not. It has so much radioactive waste, it’s clearly not clean. It’s certainly not renewable,” he said, according to the Ohio Capital Journal.
Political pressure: It remains to be seen whether Gov. DeWine will sign or veto the bill. However, he has come under intense political pressure from several environmental groups, including one called Save Ohio Parks, to veto it.
Earlier this year, DeWine found himself embroiled in controversy regarding whether an undisclosed financial contribution from FirstEnergy prompted him to sign an “energy bailout” bill to help the nuclear industry—specifically Perry and Davis-Besse nuclear power plants. DeWine denied that he was influenced by FirstEnergy’s contribution, arguing, “My position was we need to have nuclear energy, we need to have ‘all of the above.’ So that was my position. That’s what I felt. That’s what I publicly said.”
