Skip to main content

Your Nuclear Neighbor

Carpe Datum is linking to a piece Kevin Drum posted over at Political Animal on peak oil -- one that includes a long harangue about nuclear energy in the comments thread.

I could spend all day refuting its contents, but instead, I'll just focus on one issue:
Anyhow, while Mr. Nuclear is squandering money on his atom-splitting operation -- assuming he can convince any community in the nation to even accept the damned thing . . .
Actually, there are more than a few communities that would like to see a new nuclear power plant built nearby, like Fort Gibson, Mississippi:
With its grand antebellum homes, mellowed brick buildings and streets shaded by spreading live oaks, Port Gibson seems a place that time forgot. But this sleepy, historic town 25 miles south of Vicksburg is staking its future on the nuclear age.

As the nuclear power industry lays the groundwork to build plants in the United States for the first time in nearly 30 years, Port Gibson, population 1,800, is on a nuclear power consortium's short list of six "finalist candidate sites." The list was released last week.

The consortium, known as NuStart Energy, is made up of nine major utilities as well as nuclear reactor manufacturers. By working initially through a consortium to build the next nuclear plant, the individual companies may defray costs and reduce the time for building other new plants. NuStart includes the Atlanta-based Southern Co.

The leadership of Port Gibson and surrounding Claiborne County welcomed NuStart's listing.
And a few weeks ago, we shared news with our readers that Oswego, New York was also lobbying NuStart for a shot at a new reactor. And it looks like their effort had a positive effect, as Oswego is also a NuStart finalist.

On a related note, back in March, my colleague Lisa Shell pointed to an article in Money Magazine that contained the following passage:
Two studies found that the 1979 accident at Three Mile Island had no discernible impact on local home prices. That's right: The neighborhood nuke comes this close to a meltdown and property values don't even shudder.
Plenty to think about.

Technorati tags: , , , , ,

Comments

Matthew66 said…
Having read Kevin Drum's posting, I was somewhat astounded that he could observe that religious like fervor of pro-nuclear engineers, but not see the religious like fervor of his own opposition to nuclear energy. His posting was more of a diatribe or rant than a logical, reasoned argument. He is obviously an educated and intelligent man, I wish he would use his abilities to make a reasoned and informed contribution to the debate. Such polemical statements, by anyone in any debate, do not serve the debate, but merely entrench the prejudices of the opposing parties.

I used to be anti-nuclear, but then after reading an article in National Geographic in the late 1980's began to change my mind, and now, having read widely on the issues, I believe that nuclear power is the most environmentally benign form of base-load electricity generation.

Popular posts from this blog

Fluor Invests in NuScale

You know, it’s kind of sad that no one is willing to invest in nuclear energy anymore. Wait, what? NuScale Power celebrated the news of its company-saving $30 million investment from Fluor Corp. Thursday morning with a press conference in Washington, D.C. Fluor is a design, engineering and construction company involved with some 20 plants in the 70s and 80s, but it has not held interest in a nuclear energy company until now. Fluor, which has deep roots in the nuclear industry, is betting big on small-scale nuclear energy with its NuScale investment. "It's become a serious contender in the last decade or so," John Hopkins, [Fluor’s group president in charge of new ventures], said. And that brings us to NuScale, which had run into some dark days – maybe not as dark as, say, Solyndra, but dire enough : Earlier this year, the Securities Exchange Commission filed an action against NuScale's lead investor, The Michael Kenwood Group. The firm "misap

An Ohio School Board Is Working to Save Nuclear Plants

Ohio faces a decision soon about its two nuclear reactors, Davis-Besse and Perry, and on Wednesday, neighbors of one of those plants issued a cry for help. The reactors’ problem is that the price of electricity they sell on the high-voltage grid is depressed, mostly because of a surplus of natural gas. And the reactors do not get any revenue for the other benefits they provide. Some of those benefits are regional – emissions-free electricity, reliability with months of fuel on-site, and diversity in case of problems or price spikes with gas or coal, state and federal payroll taxes, and national economic stimulus as the plants buy fuel, supplies and services. Some of the benefits are highly localized, including employment and property taxes. One locality is already feeling the pinch: Oak Harbor on Lake Erie, home to Davis-Besse. The town has a middle school in a building that is 106 years old, and an elementary school from the 1950s, and on May 2 was scheduled to have a referendu

Wednesday Update

From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin