Skip to main content

The No Solutions Gang

Over the years, the nuclear energy industry has weathered some pretty scurrilous attacks at the hands of radical environmentalists -- attacks that play on people's fear, and rely on hype and hysteria instead of facts. Take this passage I came across from Ecoshock:
The American taxpayer has paid billions in secret subsidies for U.S. reactor fuel, by buying up weapons grade materials in the former Soviet Union, and shipping it back home for commercial power stations, on the cheap. There is no accounting for all the money spent on this anti-terrorism program that just happens to benefit the largest welfare industry in America.
This is a pretty typical online attack in that it offers absolutely no concrete information to make up your mind on your own. Heck, they don't even have the guts to tell you what the program is called.

Which is where we come in. The program Ecoshock is attacking is called "Megatons to Megawatts" and it has decommissioned the equivalent of 10,000 U.S. and Russian nuclear warheads, rendering them as useless as atomic weapons and fit for use as fuel in American nuclear reactors. Uranium from "Megatons to Megawatts" is used in about 10% of the U.S. reactor fleet.

By 2013, the program will have downblended 500 metric tons of weapons grade uranium -- the equivalent of 20,000 warheads. The program is administered by a private corporation, USEC.

And, despite what Ecoshock might say, the program is completely financed by private industry, not the American taxpayer. The following is from the USEC FAQ on the program:
Why was a commercial implementing contract chosen?

Both governments agreed that they wanted the program to be sustained through commercial purchases and sales of the LEU fuel. This meant that a government appropriations process was not necessary.

Has the U.S. government paid or subsidized USEC for implementing any part of this national security agreement?

No. USEC derives its compensation solely from profits of selling the Russian material to its customers.
Which begs a question that the folks at Ecoshock don't have an answer to: If "Megatons to Megawatts" isn't a wothwhile program, just what would they have done with over 500 tons of weapons grade uranium? Should we perhaps have left some of it in Russia, where it may very well have fallen into the wrong hands (as it turns out, there's still plenty of surplus weapons grade material to keep us busy for a long time)?

I won't be holding my breath for an answer.

Technorati tags: , , , , ,


Popular posts from this blog

A Billion Miles Under Nuclear Energy (Updated)

And the winner is…Cassini-Huygens, in triple overtime.

The spaceship conceived in 1982 and launched fifteen years later, will crash into Saturn on September 15, after a mission of 19 years and 355 days, powered by the audacity and technical prowess of scientists and engineers from 17 different countries, and 72 pounds of plutonium.

The mission was so successful that it was extended three times; it was intended to last only until 2008.

Since April, the ship has been continuing to orbit Saturn, swinging through the 1,500-mile gap between the planet and its rings, an area not previously explored. This is a good maneuver for a spaceship nearing the end of its mission, since colliding with a rock could end things early.

Cassini will dive a little deeper and plunge toward Saturn’s surface, where it will transmit data until it burns up in the planet’s atmosphere. The radio signal will arrive here early Friday morning, Eastern time. A NASA video explains.

In the years since Cassini has launc…

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.


The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.

What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…

Why Nuclear Plant Closures Are a Crisis for Small Town USA

Nuclear plants occupy an unusual spot in the towns where they operate: integral but so much in the background that they may seem almost invisible. But when they close, it can be like the earth shifting underfoot., the Gannett newspaper that covers the Lower Hudson Valley in New York, took a look around at the experience of towns where reactors have closed, because the Indian Point reactors in Buchanan are scheduled to be shut down under an agreement with Gov. Mario Cuomo.

From sea to shining sea, it was dismal. It wasn’t just the plant employees who were hurt. The losses of hundreds of jobs, tens of millions of dollars in payrolls and millions in property taxes depressed whole towns and surrounding areas. For example:

Vernon, Vermont, home to Vermont Yankee for more than 40 years, had to cut its municipal budget in half. The town closed its police department and let the county take over; the youth sports teams lost their volunteer coaches, and Vernon Elementary School lost th…