Metafilter Grapples with Nuclear Energy

Using a two-part feature in LA Weekly (Part I, II) as a departure point, members of the Metafilter online community are now debating the merits of new nuclear build.

And it looks like nuclear is getting a fair hearing. Some comments:

Nuclear power has been terribly demonized, but environmentalists should love it. It does almost no damage to the environment at all, unlike fossil fuels, which appear likely to change the climate on Earth and wipe out thousands (millions?) of species...

Yeah, I've never understood why environmentalists are opposed to Nuclear power. it's the only possible energy system we could use that doesn't cause much pollution.

It seems more like irrational fear then anything else...

We will have an energy crisis if we don't find some way of replacing fossil fuels. Nuclear power seems like the logical step...

Nuclear is, alas, our only hope of keeping our society at the level it is at. We, quite simply, cannot continue to burn other fuels at the levels we are on and not make the planet uninhabitable...Nuclear is the only tech we have now that 1) can generate the loads we need 2) without destroying the biosphere and 3) without taking up huge fractions of land to support it...

Be sure to read the feature by Judith Lewis that started the debate (Part I, II).

Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Environment, Energy, Politics, Technology, Economics

Comments

BadTux said…

The reason left-looney environmentalists don't like nuclear power has nothing to do with pollution, and everything to do with the fact that it's that wicked "technology" stuff that they want to do away with so that people can get "back to nature".

For another batch of left-looneys with similar ideas, see the Khmer Rouge, who forced most of Cambodia "back to nature" -- and ended up starving a quarter of their population to death because without modern civilization, you just can't raise enough food to feed the current population.

- Badtux the Glow-in-the-dark Penguin

November 14, 2005 at 1:47 PM

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...

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...

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog