Environmentalists and Southwest Virginia residents are concerned about proposed sites for small modular nuclear reactors.

The LENOWISCO Planning District's final feasibility study shows these reactors will be near local businesses, schools and residential neighborhoods.

Nuclear energy has been met with mixed reactions for its role in bolstering a state's climate goals. But concerns also linger, since they produce radioactive waste.

Nate Benforado, senior attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center, said the plan is not really viable or genuinely needed.

"There's not really a current need to build this to power people's homes," said Benforado. "The current system can handle that, and certainly we could swap out to renewable energy very cheaply, and very quickly, whereas a nuclear project is going to take more than a decade to complete."

He said this seems to be done more for drawing in business such as data centers.

A 2022 Stanford University study finds small modular reactors will produce more volume and more highly radioactive waste than traditional light-water reactor plants. This could lead to impacts for the later management and disposal of this waste.

Benforado said he also worries ratepayers will be paying for the high cost of building these facilities, even if they don't come to fruition.

Along with Virginia, Georgia and South Carolina have seen multi-billion dollar boondoggles with nuclear power plants. Before these projects barrel ahead, he said he feels there should be a better understanding of them.

"And I think we need to slow down the process and really understand what the technology is," said Benforad. "What is different about this that is different than the failed projects that we've seen in recent years, and you know, why should we be paying for it? Why should utility customers pay for it?"

He noted that a private company should take the lead to develop and build these.

Earlier this year, Virginia's General Assembly considered legislation to create a SMR pilot program. While the bill passed the Senate, it failed twice in the House.

But utility companies can apply for approval of a small modular reactor from the State Corporation Commission, the federal Nuclear Energy Regulatory Commission and local officials.

Two new studies find that without sustained intervention, California may permanently lose big sections of old-growth giant sequoia groves.

The majestic trees only grow on the western slope of the Sierra Nevada. Since 2015, 20% of them have died, mostly in three megafires in 2020 and 2021.

David Soderberg, Ph.D, a biologist with the U.S. Geological Survey and a study co-author, said the blazes incinerated many of the older, seed-bearing trees.

"You're getting much larger patches of fires burning at what's called high severity. So, you have this kind of bad combination for the sequoias where many more of the mature trees are dying, and there are many fewer of the seedlings regenerating," he explained.

The studies show there are substantially fewer seedlings than in the past, and those that germinate are imperiled by drought and heat stress linked to climate change. The Giant Sequoia Lands Coalition partners have planted more than 500,000 native seedlings in severely burned areas where reproduction has been insufficient.

Paul Ringgold, chief program officer with the Save the Redwoods League, said the idea is to give forest regeneration a head start.

"When you're planting seedlings, you're planting trees that have been grown in the nursery for two years or more. They're more robust than a seedling that is sprouting from a seed, giving it a little bit of an edge against the impact of drier, hotter summers," he said.

Old-growth sequoia are the world's largest trees and depend on fire to reproduce. But Ringgold noted that past fire-suppression efforts have led to a buildup of excessive fuel loads in the forests. So, extensive projects are underway to clear out dead vegetation and make the groves more resilient to fire.

Nearly 10,000 Montanans have petitioned the U.S. Forest Service to prevent mining activity in the iconic Smith River watershed.

The Smith is known for its majestic views and numerous wildlife species but it is also a huge draw for outdoor enthusiasts seeking to "disconnect." The Smith River Public Lands Coalition has called on the Forest Service to withdraw mineral leases granted to a company planning a $4 billion copper mine on private land near Sheep Creek, which feeds the Smith more than half of its water.

Josh Seckinger, a Bozeman-based Smith River guide, estimated he has floated the 5-day, 59-mile-long Smith 100 times. He thinks the copper sulfide mine drainage would be devastating.

"It just decimates anything with gills downstream," Seckinger pointed out. "That's fish, that's amphibians, that's aquatic bug life. It's a terrible way to sterilize a river."

Mine developer Black Butte Copper said it is committed to preserving Montana's water while creating economic development opportunities in the state, and claims it can build the mine in an environmentally friendly way.

Seckinger noted beyond the environmental and wildlife damage the mine drainage could cause, it also threatens the local landscape and the recreational economy built around the Smith River. He argued it is not just a hit to the businesses but to Montanans who want to experience the trip. It requires winning a permit in a state lottery.

"It is my hope that every resident of this state puts in for a lottery permit and wins, so they get the chance to experience this place," Seckinger emphasized. "Because once you experience this place, you understand immediately why it needs to be protected."

Black Butte Copper has bought nearly 700 claims on the public lands surrounding the one near Sheep Creek, potentially allowing the company to further expand its mining operations.


get more stories like this via email

A Michigan environmental group is addressing an appeal challenging the state's decision to approve the enclosure of the Enbridge Line 5 pipeline.

Built in 1953, this pipeline transports up to 540,000 barrels of petroleum daily through the Great Lakes.

Enbridge aims to build a protective tunnel around a four mile segment at the Straits of Mackinac, which connects Lake Michigan and Lake Huron.

Environmental groups and tribal leaders want the state to reverse Enbridge's permit, citing concerns about a potential catastrophic oil spill.

The nonprofit group Oil & Water Don't Mix is dedicated to preventing oil spills and promoting clean energy - and they support the appeal.

David Holtz, an international coordinator with the group, discussed the next steps.

"And the next big hurdle that the tunnel will have will be during the federal permitting process," said Holtz, "so we're going to be focusing on that in the coming days."

Enbridge spokesperson Ryan Duffy said in an email statement that Line 5's safety is exclusively regulated by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.

Enbridge maintains that it also conducts internal inspections via an MRI-like tool known as a "pig" that travels the line, recording data on the pipe's thickness and looking for cracks, dents or signs of corrosion.

Holtz said his organization will continue its efforts to make the public and the federal government aware of what needs to be done regarding Line 5.

"The need for the Biden administration," said Holtz, "to take a stand in support of its own climate policy by rejecting the tunnel."

Holtz added that the permitting process, known as the Environmental Impact Study, will be open for public comment - and is set for early next year.