Skip to main content

One of These Things is Not Like the Other...

Can you tell the difference?

This photo is from the pro-nuclear rally in Jackson today:



This one is from the anti-nuclear protest a short time later:



Hint: Count the heads!

Comments

Kevin McCoy said…
Lisa, I had read about anti-nukes who used an ice sculpture of a nuclear power plants as part of a publicity stunt, so I was pleased to finally see a picture of such a sculpture. Pretty cool, huh?

My understanding of the symbolism is perhaps a bit different from that of the antis. Ice is commonly used to cool something that is too warm. So the message I get from the picture is that the antis are saying, "The solution to global warming is sitting right here in front of us, and we refuse to admit it."
Paul Gunter said…
Pretty cool, Entergy bussed a bunch of Grand Goof employees to Jackson.
Anonymous said…
Wow Paul, that kind of creative name calling is sure to convince a lot of people to take up the "No Nukes" mantra ... very professional!
So Paul, did the cost of your trip to Mississippi come out of your own pocket or did NIRS pay for it?

Yes, there were some Entergy employees there. I don't know how many attended, but at least a few of them located in Jackson used their lunch hour to attend the rally. But even if there were nuclear professionals from Grand Gulf in attendance, what does that prove? Entergy employees are the people closest to the operation of the plant. If the claims of antinuclear activists are true, their health and safety, and that of their families are the most at-risk. If the people closest to operations are confident enough in the safety and security of the plant to publicly support new nuclear, I believe it is a powerful demonstration to the layperson that the risks are manageable.

Furthermore, my colleagues from Virginia used their own vacation time and paid their own expenses for the trip. NA-YGN members in North Carolina volunteered their time to make posters for the rally. There are many examples of people volunteering their time and their money to support new nuclear power because they believe it should remain an important part of a balanced energy mix in the this country.

In short, to posit that anyone that supports nuclear power must be a lackey of the big bad corporations is a flimsy, and offensive, attempt to attack the messenger.

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…

Nuclear Is a Long-Term Investment for Ohio that Will Pay Big

With 50 different state legislative calendars, more than half of them adjourn by June, and those still in session throughout the year usually take a recess in the summer. So springtime is prime time for state legislative activity. In the next few weeks, legislatures are hosting hearings and calling for votes on bills that have been battered back and forth in the capital halls.

On Tuesday, The Ohio Public Utilities Committee hosted its third round of hearings on the Zero Emissions Nuclear Resources Program, House Bill 178, and NEI’s Maria Korsnick testified before a jam-packed room of legislators.


Washingtonians parachuting into state debates can be a tricky platform, but in this case, Maria’s remarks provided national perspective that put the Ohio conundrum into context. At the heart of this debate is the impact nuclear plants have on local jobs and the local economy, and that nuclear assets should be viewed as “long-term investments” for the state. Of course, clean air and electrons …