Nuclear energy research gets green light in North Dakota
The North Dakota Legislature is opening the door for nuclear energy research in the state.
The House of Representatives on Wednesday passed Senate Bill 2159 to allow the Energy and Environmental Research Center in Grand Forks to study nuclear energy.
The House passed the EERC bill 57-32. The bill previously passed the Senate 45-2. The bill returns to the Senate after being amended by the House.
Advocates of nuclear research said North Dakota should not fall behind amid a resurgence of interest in nuclear energy.
'We need to be a part of the conversation,' said Rep. Jon Nelson, R-Rugby.
Nelson represents an area where the U.S. Department of Energy proposed drilling an exploratory borehole to test the stability of the rock for nuclear waste storage.
After that proposal, North Dakota lawmakers sought to clarify the law related to high-level radioactive waste storage. A group of concerned citizens pushed for language in a bill approved in 2019 that prohibits 'the placement, storage, exploration, testing, or disposal of high-level radioactive waste' in North Dakota.
The EERC research bill could lead to above-ground storage. Some opponents said they feared the bill could allow unwanted radioactive nuclear waste into the state.
Nelson disagreed.
'We do not want to become a dumping ground,' Nelson said. 'I think the protections are there.'
The protections include an amendment that the state Industrial Commission, in consultation with the state's High-Level Radioactive Waste Advisory Council, must approve any nuclear research that EERC proposes to do.
The EERC is designated as the State Energy Research Center with oversight by the Industrial Commission. EERC submitted testimony in support of the bill.
The EERC research bill was sponsored by Senate Majority Leader David Hogue, R-Minot, who chaired the Energy Development and Transmission Committee that examined the possibilities for nuclear energy between legislative sessions.
North Dakota eyes next-generation nuclear as replacement for coal plants
Rep. Todd Porter, R-Mandan, pointed to a former coal plant in Wyoming that is being converted into a small nuclear facility as an example of competition from other states that are reusing spent nuclear fuel rods.
Porter suggested that nuclear fuel rods at the nuclear power plant in Monticello, Minnesota, could be used in North Dakota, but he said the research needs to be done first.
'Allow EERC to do the job that they're supposed to be doing for the people of North Dakota … advancing the all-of-the-above energy portfolio that we asked them to do,' Porter said.
The House also passed House Bill 1025 that calls for a legislative study of the potential for nuclear power plants in North Dakota.
Rep. Jared Hendrix, R-Fargo, argued for waiting for results of the study before authorizing nuclear research.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Washington Post
5 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Before the attacks, Senate candidates seek to define themselves in Kentucky
CALVERT CITY, Ky. — Three Republicans competing to succeed longtime Sen. Mitch McConnell tried to define themselves before the political attacks that could come Saturday when they share the spotlight at the Fancy Farm picnic, a daunting rite of passage for candidates seeking statewide office in Kentucky. 'You're going to hear some barbs tomorrow, but what I want to focus on is my vision for serving in the United States Senate,' Daniel Cameron, one of the candidates, told a GOP crowd Friday evening.


Hamilton Spectator
19 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Donald Trump's next target could be deal that shields most Canadian imports from tariffs, experts warn
Canada's biggest shield against U.S. tariffs is still intact after Donald Trump's latest trade deadline, but that could change by next year, experts warn, as Prime Minister Mark Carney prepares for a new round of talks with the mercurial American president. While Trump raised the tariff on Canadian goods to 35 per cent in an executive order Thursday night, an exemption for goods which comply with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) was maintained. The order was signed after Ottawa and Washington failed to reach an economic and security deal. That means, most economists agree, that roughly 90 per cent of Canadian exports will still enter the U.S. tariff-free. But, warned BMO chief economist Douglas Porter, that agreement is up for renegotiation in 2026. 'Even though we're in a relatively good spot right now, I don't think that should give us much confidence in the longer term,' Porter said Friday. With CUSMA-compliant goods facing no tariffs, and sector-specific tariffs of 50 per cent on steel and aluminum, Canadian goods currently face an average tariff in the low single digits. But that could easily change when the agreement is renegotiated, Porter added. The fact that Canadian negotiators weren't able to get any agreement lowering the 35 per cent tariff — or cutting sector-specific tariffs — ahead of Trump's Aug. 1 deadline isn't exactly reassuring either, Porter said. 'It really does raise some questions over how smoothly the renegotiation of (CUSMA) is going to go,' said Porter. 'We're going to come into it with the U.S. holding this 35 per cent over our head.' Shortly after midnight on Thursday, just after the hike came into effect, Carney said he was 'disappointed' by Trump's decision, after Canadian officials spent several days this week hunkered down in Washington meeting with U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and representatives of Senate Republicans. 'We remain committed to CUSMA, which is the world's second-largest free trade agreement by trading volume,' Carney's statement read. 'Other sectors of our economy — including lumber, steel, aluminum, and automobiles — are, however, heavily impacted by U.S. duties and tariffs. For such sectors, the Canadian government will act to protect Canadian jobs, invest in our industrial competitiveness, buy Canadian and diversify our export markets.' Dominic LeBlanc, Carney's point-person on Canada-U.S. trade, told Radio-Canada's 'Midi info' that Canadian officials have always maintained that they 'wouldn't accept just any agreement.' 'We'd accept an agreement that was in the interests of workers, of the Canadian economy, and at the end of the day yesterday that agreement wasn't in sight,' LeBlanc said Friday, as he was set to leave Washington after meeting with Lutnick on Thursday. The head of the association representing small businesses said Canada avoided the worst-case scenario this week by keeping CUSMA-compliant goods tariff-free, but said the country is not out of the woods yet. In next year's renegotiation, the U.S. could give preferential status to goods which comply with CUSMA — but that doesn't mean they'd still be duty free, warned Dan Kelly, CEO of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. 'That's absolutely one of the prospects I fear,' said Kelly of the idea that U.S. negotiators would try to put tariffs on CUSMA-compliant goods. 'There's also nothing stopping him from pulling out of CUSMA altogether. That would be the nuclear scenario.' A senior official with the Canadian Chamber of Commerce also said Canadian businesses need to be wary of the CUSMA revamp, and any lingering uncertainty until it's completed. 'The review could start Monday,' said Matthew Holmes, the chamber's head of public policy. 'But we're going to be talking about CUSMA until 2026, and that's the third act of this play.' At the moment, Holmes estimated, Canadian exports to the U.S. face an average tariff of anywhere from 2.9 to five per cent, which still gives this country the best treatment of any American trading partner. Still, Holmes isn't under any illusion that that low rate will continue — even if Canada's access remains better than most. 'I think it's reasonable to expect they come to the table with a baseline tariff,' Holmes said of U.S. negotiators. 'If they establish a floor of 15 per cent on the world and we come in at 10, we're in relatively good shape, but it's still not great for our businesses.' For sectors like steel and aluminum which still face targeted tariffs, the continuation of the CUSMA exemption didn't provide much comfort at all, said Catherine Cobden, CEO of the Canadian Steel Producers Association. 'What we see is some of our largest trading allies, both with us and the United States, accepting and normalizing 50 per cent tariffs,' said Cobden. 'That cannot happen in the case of Canada.' 'We don't have months to wait for a USMCA process. We are in the thick of it now,' she said. Dan Ujczo, an Ohio-based international trade lawyer, said in spite of sectoral pressures, Canada needs to get a clearer sense of the deals the White House has struck with the European Union, Japan and South Korea. 'Canada and Mexico started these negotiations with the best access to the United States in the world. They don't want to put themselves in a position now to accept a deal where that's going to get them less access to the United States than any other trading partner, so I think we still need to see what those other parties have agreed to,' said Ujczo, who has also worked for both Canadian and U.S. governments. Ujczo also said it's time for Carney and other Canadian political leaders to dial down the partisan rhetoric. On Friday, the Conservatives and the NDP accused Carney of failing to improve circumstances for Canadian workers. 'This is a negotiation,' Ujzco said. 'The political campaigns are over now.'


Hamilton Spectator
34 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Limited options for Democrats to retaliate if Texas Republicans redraw congressional map
WASHINGTON (AP) — As Republicans move to redraw legislative maps in red states to pad their narrow House majority in Washington, some Democrats are rethinking their embrace of a nonpartisan approach to line-drawing that now complicates their party's ability to hit back before next year's midterm elections. In many Democratic-controlled states, independent commissions rather than the state legislature handle redistricting, the normally-once-a-decade task of adjusting congressional and legislative districts so their populations are equal. Parties in the majority can exploit that process to shape their lawmakers' districts so they are almost guaranteed reelection. The commission model limits parties' ability to game the system, leading to more competitive districts. Not all redistricting commissions were created at Democrats' insistence. And, like Republicans, the party has exploited line-drawing for its own gain in the handful of states where it controls the process. But unlike Republicans, many Democratic Party leaders have embraced the nonpartisan model. That means Democrats have fewer options to match Republicans, who are redrawing the U.S. House map in Texas at President Donald Trump's urging to carve out as many as five new winnable seats for the GOP. That could be enough to prevent Democrats from winning back the majority next year. Democrats have threatened payback. During a gathering Friday in Wisconsin of Democratic governors, several of them said they wanted to retaliate because the stakes are so high. Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers, who has pushed for a nonpartisan redistricting commission in his state, said Democrats must 'do whatever we can' to counter the Republican efforts to redraw congressional maps. 'When you have a gun against your head, you've got to do something,' he said. Despite the ambitious talk, Democrats largely have their hands tied. Democratic states have limited ability to redistrict for political edge California Gov. Gavin Newsom has said he and the Democratic-controlled Legislature will try to redraw his state's congressional map. But they would need to repeal or defy the 2008 ballot measure creating an independent redistricting commission. Voters extended its authority to congressional districts two years later. Newsom supported the constitutional amendment at the time, when he was mayor of San Francisco. The Texas redistricting, which is expected to pass the Legislature next week, led him to modify that position. 'We can act holier than thou, we can sit on the sidelines, talk about the way the world should be, or we can recognize the existential nature that is this moment,' Newsom said earlier this month. In New York, which also has a commission, the state constitution bars another map this decade. Democrats have moved for a change, but that could not happen until 2027 at the earliest, and then only with voter approval. In other states where Democrats control the governor's office and legislature, including Colorado and Washington, the party has backed independent commissions that cannot redraw, let alone rig, maps in the middle of the decade. Democrats say 'foundations of our democracy' at stake When the redistricting cycle kicked off in 2021, after the last census, independent commissions were in charge of drawing 95 House seats that otherwise would have been drawn by Democrats, but only 13 that would have been created by Republicans. In a marker of the shift among Democrats, former Attorney General Eric Holder, who heads the party's redistricting effort and has called repeatedly for a more nonpartisan approach, seemed to bless his party's long shot efforts to overrule their commissions. 'We do not oppose – on a temporary basis – responsible, responsive actions to ensure that the foundations of our democracy are not permanently eroded,' Holder said in a statement last week. In states where they weren't checked by commissions, Democrats have redistricted just as ruthlessly as Republicans. In Illinois, they drew a map that gave them a 14-3 advantage in the congressional delegation. In New Mexico, they tweaked the map so they control all three House seats. In Nevada, they held three of its four seats in November despite Trump winning the state. Even in states where they have a lopsided advantage, Democrats are exploring ways to maximize it. On Friday, Maryland's House Majority Leader, Democratic Del. David Moon, said he would introduce legislation to trigger redrawing of the congressional lines if Texas moves forward. Democrats hold seven of the state's eight congressional seats. 'We can't have one state, especially a very large state, constantly trying to one-up and alter the course of congressional control while the other states sit idly by,' he said. Commissions promote 'fair representation,' advocates say Advocates of a nonpartisan model are alarmed by the shift among Democrats. They say the party would redistrict just as aggressively as the GOP if not held in check, depriving voters of a voice in districts whose winners would essentially be selected in advance by political leaders. 'We're very desperate — we're looking for any port in a storm,' said Emily Eby French, Common Cause's Texas director. 'This Democratic tit for tat redistricting seems like a port but it's not a port. It's a jagged rock with a bunch of sirens on them.' The group's director of redistricting, Dan Vicuña, said using redistricting for partisan advantage — known as gerrymandering — is highly unpopular with the public: 'This is about fair representation for communities.' Politicians used to shy away from discussing it openly, but that has changed in today's polarized environment. Trump earlier this month told reporters about his hopes of netting five additional GOP seats in Texas and more out of other Republican-controlled states. He has urged new maps in GOP-controlled states such as Indiana and Missouri, while Ohio Republicans are poised to reshape political lines after neutralizing a push to create an independent redistricting commission. Democrats are divided over how to respond to Texas In a sign of the party's divide, Democrats have continued to push for a national redistricting panel that would remove partisanship from the process, even as some call for retaliation against Republicans in defiance of state limitations. 'No unilateral disarmament till both sides are following the law,' said Arizona Sen. Ruben Gallego, like Newsom a possible 2028 presidential contender, wrote on X. Gallego's post came a day before his Democratic colleagues gathered to announce they were reintroducing a bill to create the national commission. An identical bill died in 2022 when it couldn't overcome Republican objections despite Democrats controlling Congress and the presidency. It has no chance now that the GOP is in charge of both branches. Sen. Chris Murphy, another potential 2028 contender, didn't express regret over past reforms that have implemented independent redistricting boards in Democratic states, saying the party 'should never apologize for being for the right thing.' But he added that Republicans 'are operating outside of the box right now and we can't stay inside the box.' 'If they're changing districts in the middle of the 10-year cycle, we have to do the same thing,' he said. That approach, however, hasn't caught on across the party. 'We shouldn't stoop to their tactics,' Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut said. 'It's an ideal that we have accurate and fair representation. We can't abandon it just because Republicans try to manipulate and distort it.' ___ Riccardi reported from Denver. Associated Press writers Scott Bauer in Madison, Wisconsin, Jaimie Ding in Los Angeles, Anthony Izaguirre in Albany, New York, and Brian Witte in Annapolis, Maryland, contributed to this report. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .