Skip to main content

Columnists Support Nuclear Energy

Support for nuclear energy is a growing trend among columnists at major newspapers, many of whom are self-described environmentalists.

“As a radical environmentalist, I support Progress Energy’s plans to build a nuclear power plant in Florida,” columnist Mike Thomas wrote in the Oct. 11 edition of the Orlando Sentinel.

Michael Fumento, the environment columnists for Scripps Howard News Service, wrote in September that “environmentalists think cheap food and housing are great, yet somehow affordable energy from any source is evil. Saintliness, to them, is achieved by paying through the nose for extravagantly inefficient power sources like windmills and solar panels. Well, let them build a windmill in their backyards. The rest of us need an exorcism from the demons of anti-nuclear hysteria.”

Finally, Oregonian columnist David Reinhard back in June wrote the following in his column entitled At Long Last, It’s Nuclear Option Time: “…as fears about greenhouse gases and global warming grow – and the practical problem of filling the world’s energy needs with non-emission sources becomes ever more apparent – today’s nuclear environmentalists may come to be seen as prophets.”

This does not come as much of a surprise. A May nationwide survey of adults by Bisconti Research Inc./NOP World revealed that 71 percent of environmentalists favor the use of nuclear energy as one of the ways to generate electricity.

Comments

Wineandsky said…
interesting how the columnists consistent revert back to gargantuan mass community solutions. Most of the real extream environmentalists live in small, self sustaining communities bent on working together to grow the food, nurture the people, ail the sick, and create a commerce for themselves.
Wineandsky said…
oops, sorry for the misspelled words....consistently and extreme

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 …