Minnesota Poll: Most approve of an Xcel bill with strings

Tom Meersman, Star Tribune
Published May 7, 2003	NUKE07

An overwhelming majority of Minnesotans say Xcel Energy should be required to invest in wind and other renewable energy sources as a condition of continuing to operate its Prairie Island nuclear power plant in Red Wing. A Star Tribune Minnesota Poll of 1,033 adults found that 86 percent approve of such an arrangement and 8 percent disapprove.

The future of Prairie Island has been an issue at the Capitol in recent months after Xcel officials announced that the plant will need to shut down in 2007 unless the Legislature authorizes more storage casks for radioactive waste at the plant. The nearly 30-year-old plant provides about 20 percent of the electricity used by 1.5 million Xcel customers in the Upper Midwest.

Legislators have mostly agreed that the plant should be kept open, but they differ on how long and under what conditions.

A House bill authorizes the additional storage but does not tie it to new requirements for renewable energy.

A final Senate bill has yet to emerge. One of two proposals under consideration links the nuclear waste storage to new requirements for more wind farms and plant-fueled power plants, and more research in technology such as fuel cells and hydrogen.

The poll question results were nearly identical whether the respondents were men or women, or whether they lived in the seven-county metro area or elsewhere. There were some differences between Republicans (81 percent approved of the arrangement) and DFLers (90 percent), and between liberals (94 percent) and conservatives (82 percent).

In a separate question, the poll found that 51 percent of those surveyed say Xcel should be allowed to store only enough nuclear waste to operate the Prairie Island plant for another 10 years; 35 percent say the utility should be allowed unlimited nuclear waste storage so that its Prairie Island and Monticello nuclear plants could operate for about 30 more years.

Xcel officials have indicated they hope to run both plants into the 2030s, which would require not only that the state authorize more waste storage but also that the federal government relicense the plants.

Those who were most likely to say Xcel should have unlimited waste storage and a longer nuclear future tended to be men, those with less education, Republicans and conservatives.

Lyndon Thiel of Hutchinson said limiting Prairie Island's nuclear waste storage and operations to 10 more years would be a mistake because it would result in "cycling young men and women through jobs at the plant." Thiel said firms such as Xcel need to have confidence about the future to attract high-quality workers to long-term careers.

Chris Mortenson of Burnsville agreed and said the continuation of nuclear power should not be contingent on renewable energy requirements. "Government shouldn't be telling businesses what they have to do," he said.

But others said nuclear waste is a serious and complicated problem. Those most likely to say Xcel should be allowed only limited waste expansion for the next decade tended to be those with more education, DFLers and liberals.

Nancy Leland of Mendota Heights said that she is enough of a realist to accept that nuclear power needs to continue for at least the short term but that the policy needs to be reviewed periodically. "I strongly feel that we shouldn't have an open-ended policy for Xcel to just operate its nuclear plants indefinitely," she said.

Leland said allowing the utility to run the nuclear plants longer will decrease its motivation to look seriously at developing other sources of energy. Like many others who prefer a 10-year limit on Prairie Island, Leland said Xcel should be required to build more wind farms and develop other technology in the meantime. "I think there's a lot of ingenuity out there that's not being tapped," she said.

Brian Fogerty of St. Paul said it's reasonable to require more renewable energy as a "quid pro quo" if nuclear power plants continue to operate. "Legislatures and Congress have an obligation to use the power they have to make corporate America do the right thing," he said.

Fogerty said he doesn't see government mandates as punitive but as ways to stimulate research and technology that benefit society and that would otherwise be developed slowly, if at all.

Other poll respondents said they can accept unlimited storage of nuclear waste because they expect that Minnesota will need to rely on nuclear power for quite some time. However, they also strongly approve of requirements to spur development of Minnesota's energy resources.

Susan Glenna of Winona said that nuclear power plants are a "necessary evil" and that "we don't have a choice but to keep them open." But she expressed hope that government mandates and a better-educated younger generation will be twin forces to develop solutions.

Barb Zimmerman of Buyck, in St. Louis County, said she is not "paranoid" about nuclear power but feels strongly that Minnesota needs to develop alternatives.

"I think Xcel should be required to take some of their profits and try to find a safer way of producing power," she said. "I know it's not that simple to come up with solutions for energy, but it shouldn't be one of our hardest problems either."

Tom Meersman is at meersman@startribune.com.