Skip to main content

Phone Call From POGO

Just got a call from Beth Daly at the Project for Government Oversight, who explained that their post from last week about the ABC series on "Loose Nukes" was a misunderstanding. As soon as they update their blog with their side of the story, I'll be happy to share it with you.

UPDATE: Here's the updated post from POGO:

Apparently, the Nuclear Energy Institute misunderstood us when we said "POGO consulted on” the ABC News investigative series, “Loose Nukes.” “Consulted” did not mean POGO was hired by ABC or was paid any money. In fact, we wish we could get paid for our expertise as many people do by news media outlets. But, in order to maintain an independent stance and protect our credibility, POGO does not accept money from corporations such as ABC. We also wanted to clarify that we are not an anti-nuclear organization. We have never taken a position on the merits or the drawbacks of nuclear energy.

More later, if warranted.

Technorati tags: , , , ,

Comments

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Revision:

As I thought. I found their link in an anti-nuclear link farm and tried to find anything mentioning nuclear energy on their site; I could not find anything.
ilovenukes said…
Wow, a comment was deleted...does that mean NEI is going the way of ABC?
ilovenukes said…
duh Stewart (having that name almost certainly qualifies that you are dumb) maybe they don't have a position on nuclear energy...which would mean they were not anti-nuclear...
Good morning, bozo.

They aren't anti-nuclear. They're neutral. That's what I said.

Go learn how to read.

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 …

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.

Huh?

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 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…