Glenn Gets Nuclear

Eric thought our readers would be interested in learning about my experience as a guest on the Glenn Beck show on CNN Headline News. If you missed it, I found a transcript here.

I was asked last week by our media relations folks here at NEI if I would be interested in filling in for colleague Mary Quillian on a talk show. I don’t have a lot of media experience but there is no better way to improve than to actually do it so I agreed. That’s when I discovered that it was a dating game format. I was a bit wary but was assured by my coworkers that I would be fine.

At this point we weren’t even sure that the segment would happen. Apparently the producers were having trouble finding people to represent other energy technologies.

But by Friday morning everything was a go. The producer called and gave me an outline of what would happen. That afternoon I arrived at the CNN office in Washington and was rushed through security and then to makeup. I was given an ear bud and a microphone, led to a little room with lights, a chair, a stand and a humongous camera and...was left alone. Luckily, my coworker and media guru Trish Conrad arrived so I had someone to talk to. Eventually the technician came back and told me that soon I would hear Glenn and the producers through my ear piece and showed me where to look when they began talking to me. When I spoke to the producers they told me that I would be energy bachelor #1 and when I heard the introduction I should smile and wave to the camera like people do on game shows. That explains my cheesy grin in the beginning.

I was surprised to learn that there wasn’t any video feed and that I would not be able to see Glenn or any of the other guests. I could just hear them. Even the camera was remotely operated. It is very strange to talk into a blank screen!

I thought the show was a bit goofy but I wasn’t above playing along. I was able to get in most of my talking points: Nuclear is safe, clean, and reliable. The one thing I missed mentioning is that it has the lowest production cost of anything that doesn’t require building a dam. When I won, I thought I would have more time at the end to get that point in, but then Glenn started talking about Iran and I can only guess that the “lead shroud in Russia” thing was about Chernobyl. Grrr...I would have loved to take a crack at that!

I thought the coal representative did a clever job with the question about polluting the night sky. I didn’t realize that the coal industry has been able to increase output AND reduce emissions at the same time. I’ll have to find those numbers. I wonder how he felt about the “fake sponsor” ad after the segment. It was very unflattering for coal!

I thought the hydrogen representative was a bit confusing. We already know hydrogen as a fuel source? Maybe if you work on the space shuttle…But hey, I won’t complain. If he wants a diverse supply of hydrogen, he probably knows that nuclear will have to play a role!

And I have to admit that I gritted my teeth when I watched the show and saw that the next segment was about Iran and nuclear weapons. Argh. I work so hard to explain the huge differences that separate commercial power and weapons and a talk-show host can neutralize that at will. Ah well, obviously there is still work to be done!

Overall it was an interesting learning experience. Thanks to those that watched!

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...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...

How Much Land Does Nuclear, Wind and Solar Really Need?

Not too long ago, we reviewed a report that looked at nuclear energy (and other energy sources) as biodiversity agents. This had to do, in part, with the amount of land a facility needs to function. Nuclear energy and fossil fuel plants use relatively little, wind farms and solar arrays quite a lot of land . Based on an objective and transparent analysis of our sustainable energy choices, we have come to the evidence-based conclusion that nuclear energy is a good option for biodiversity conservation (and society in general) and that other alternatives to fossil fuels should be subjected to the same cost–benefit analyses (in terms of biodiversity and climate outcomes, as well as sociopolitical imperatives) before accepting or dismissing them. Writer Barry Brook, who collected 75 scientists to endorse his paper, is interested in land use as it impacts flora and fauna. Biodiversity concerns do not get as much play as they might – and, when they do, it annoys many when land is withdraw...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog