Recent Posts
- Northwest Contract Awards Pick Up
- Sound Transit Plan goes on the Ballot
- Sound Transit Readies 15-Year Plan
- Pickens Plan Centers on Wind Power
- Planning the Future of Washington's Airports
- Wyoming-Oregon Natural Gas Pipeline Planned
- Positive Responses to Crane Shutdowns
- Construction Industry Addresses Ethics Issues
- Three Tower Cranes Shut Down in Seattle Area
- Seattle Light Rail Project Marks A Milestone
Recent Comments
- Carl Molesworth on Pickens Plan Centers on Wind Power
- pamela brown on Pickens Plan Centers on Wind Power
- Carl Molesworth on Construction Industry Addresses Ethics Issues
- LK on Where's the Recession?
- LK on Six Tips for Improving Contest Entries
Most Commented On
- Construction Industry Addresses Ethics Issues (2)
- Pickens Plan Centers on Wind Power (2)
- Six Tips for Improving Contest Entries (1)
- Where's the Recession? (1)
Archives
Blog
Eastern Idaho Chosen for Uranium Enrichment Plant
May 16, 2008
I’m surprised that the announcement by a French-backed company, Areva Inc., that it has chosen to build a $2 billion uranium enrichment plant outside Idaho Falls, Idaho, didn’t cause a bigger stir than it did.
Proponents estimate that the plant will boost the eastern Idaho economy by $5 billion in direct and indirect effects over a 30-year period, but the company’s announcement May 6 rated barely a mention in the media outside of the local area. I didn’t see anything about here in Washington, even though this was one of the four other states in the running to get the facility. Even in Boise, the Idaho Business Review ran its story on page 2.
Of course, construction of the plant still cannot be considered imminent. Even though the Idaho Legislature passed two bills this session granting significant financial incentives to Areva, the project still needs to gain approval from local, state and national agencies, including a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. That could take three years, even if the NRC doesn’t change direction after a new presidential administration takes office in early 2009.
I’m not a big fan of nuclear power, having taken part in the news coverage of the botched attempt by the Washington Public Power Supply System to build five nuclear plants in this state back in the 1970s and early ’80s. I also share the concerns of the Snake River Alliance, whose members point out that the perceived short-term economic benefits of building the facility mask the long-term reality that there is still no permanent solution for dealing with nuclear waste.
Still, selection of the Idaho site for the plant is a big deal. For starters, building the facility, which will produce fuel for nuclear power plants, would create an estimated 1,000 construction jobs over seven years. After that, the 250 permanent jobs would pay salaries starting at $68,000 per year. Then there the 575 indirect jobs created to service the plant and its employees. That would add up to a huge impact on any local economy, but it’s especially significant in a somewhat sparsely populated area such as eastern Idaho.
It’s also significant that the Idaho Falls area, home of the Idaho National Laboratory, has a long and mostly friendly relationship with the nuclear industry. It will bear watching to see how Areva’s project progresses through the approval process.
Until next time …
Posted by Carl Molesworth on May 16, 2008 | Comments (0)
| |||
Pacific Builder and Engineer - Current Issue



