Nuclear & Smart Grid Go 
In a Senate Budget Committee meeting yesterday, Energy Secretary Chu indicated that despite reduced funding for the spent nuclear fuel repository, Yucca Mountain, this does not mean that the Administration is anti-nuclear power. In fact, Chu expects to convene a blue ribbon panel this year to discuss storage alternatives. In the mean time (and for next decade?), dry cask storage of spent fuel should be adequate. Under repeated questioning by Sen Gregg, Chu said that there will be more nuclear power plants permitted (31 in line) and that nuclear is an important part of the US generation mix.
Chu also indicated that (clean) coal is also important part of the gen mix and doesn’t expect the US to turn its back on this large resource.
During a Smart Grid hearing for the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee, representatives from FERC, DOE and NIST indicated that their “biggest fears” concerning the rapid implementation of Smart Grid technologies were 1) that the different stakeholders would not effectively work together, 2) consistent standards would not be developed, 3) an appropriate utility rate structure does not yet exist, 4) cyber-security and 5) stranded costs and obsolescence. At the same hearing, Fred Butler of the National Association of Regulated Utility Commissioners (NARUC) thought that the current initiatives were putting the “cart before the horse.” Specifically meaning that the demonstration projects are more focused on the demand/customer side versus the operational (T&D). In addition, he didn’t want to see the same mistakes made as were felt during the “Electricity Deregulation Era.” Ultimately, he thought that there needed to be more efforts to explain why customers needed a better more digitized grid and that the eventual increase in rates would be supported. Industry group Gridwise did not see that new transmission lines constitute part of a comprehensive Smart Grid system.
this is a test of the comment section