COLUMBUS, OH — The Ohio Nuclear Development Authority (ONDA) has emerged as a controversial entity, tucked into the state budget without public debate or independent legislative approval. Critics have called ONDA a “shadowy state agency” that is heavily influenced by industry insiders and corporate interests, reigniting concerns about transparency and the risks associated with nuclear energy expansion.
The Ohio Nuclear Development Authority: A Shadowy Entity
ONDA was quietly established as part of Ohio’s state budget, avoiding the public scrutiny that would come with a stand-alone bill. Opponents argue this secretive approach undermines public trust and ensures the agency serves private interests over the public good. Anti-nuclear advocates are particularly concerned about the makeup of ONDA’s leadership, which they claim is “stacked with industry insiders” who prioritize nuclear expansion while neglecting its environmental and safety risks.
ONDA’s Industry-Tied Leadership: Who’s Involved?
A closer look at ONDA reveals a roster of members with deep ties to the nuclear industry. Critics say these appointments reflect a clear bias toward expanding nuclear power without adequately addressing its long-term dangers. Here’s a breakdown of the key figures shaping Ohio’s nuclear future through ONDA:
• Alicia Walls: A Nuclear Criticality Safety Engineer at BWX Technologies, Walls focuses on the safe handling of nuclear materials. While her expertise in safety is vital, her work aligns with the industry’s push for continued operations rather than confronting the challenges of waste disposal and environmental impact.
• Steven Moore: CEO of Veolia Nuclear Solutions - Federal Services, Moore specializes in nuclear waste management. His leadership highlights the industry’s reliance on temporary fixes for radioactive waste, rather than advocating for renewable energy alternatives that avoid creating waste altogether.
• Raymond Cao: A professor and director at Ohio State University’s Nuclear Reactor Laboratory, Cao is a vocal proponent of nuclear technology. His advocacy for nuclear advancements raises questions about whether ONDA is prioritizing public safety over industry innovation.
• Mark Miller: A senior nuclear consultant with a background in regulatory frameworks, Miller’s career has focused on maintaining and expanding the nuclear sector’s influence. Critics worry his involvement will ensure ONDA prioritizes industry growth over addressing nuclear energy’s inherent flaws.
• Michael Snee: A longtime energy policy leader in Ohio, Snee’s work in advancing nuclear power reflects a focus on economic benefits despite public concerns about radioactive waste and potential contamination.
• William Thesling: A nuclear engineer focused on reactor efficiency, Thesling’s work supports innovation within the industry. However, his emphasis on expansion leaves questions about whether ONDA will seriously address the unresolved issue of nuclear waste storage.
What’s at Stake for Ohio?
The establishment of ONDA, coupled with its leadership’s deep industry ties, has reignited debate about nuclear energy’s role in Ohio’s future. Critics point to unresolved issues such as:
• Radioactive Waste: Ohio has no permanent solution for the highly hazardous materials produced by nuclear energy. Temporary storage poses risks to communities and ecosystems.
• Environmental Damage: From uranium mining to reactor operations, nuclear energy causes lasting environmental harm that cannot be mitigated by new technologies alone.
• Accident Risks: Nuclear disasters are rare but catastrophic, as seen in Chernobyl and Fukushima. Critics argue the risk is too great to justify continued expansion.
A Call for Transparency and Accountability
As ONDA begins its work, opponents are calling for greater public involvement and scrutiny of its actions. They argue Ohio should prioritize investments in renewable energy sources—like wind, solar, and energy storage—that are safer, more sustainable, and free of radioactive waste.
Ohio’s energy future remains uncertain, but one thing is clear: ONDA’s secretive creation and industry-aligned leadership will keep the debate over nuclear energy burning for years to come.
Add comment
Comments