Skip to main content

U.S. and Russia Bring Nuclear to Fore at G8

Building on the announcement from earlier this week where the U.S. and Russia reaffirmed their commitment to the MOX fuel program, the two countries followed it up with a long-expected joint statement instructing their governments to begin talks on advancing the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.

Jim Hoagland of the Washington Post likes what he sees so far:
Bush's determination to talk the world past its nuclear fears is evidenced not only in his bold proposed deals with India and Russia but also in his willingness to praise France, a country that is not one of his favorites, on this score.

"France has built 58 plants since the 1970s and now gets 78 percent of its electricity from nuclear power," Bush said on May 24. "They don't have to worry about natural gas coming from somewhere else. They worry about it, but they don't have to worry about it to the extent that we do."

Driven by events, rather than by any grand concept of his own, Bush has correctly identified nuclear energy as an important component in reducing global warming and pollution, combating proliferation and cutting the unhealthy dependence of industrial and developing nations alike on suppliers such as Saudi Arabia and Venezuela. Bush must now show that his turn to nuclear is not simply short-term opportunism and ad hoc reaction to crisis but a well-integrated approach to a safer future.
It's good to see Hoagland recognize what Bush is doing, but I can't understand the comment concerning "short-term opportunism"when the Bush Administration has made nuclear a centerpiece of national energy policy from the outset, with the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership being just the latest piece.

For more on Russia from earlier this week, click here.

Technorati tags: , , , , , ,


Rod Adams said…

Though the Bush Administration has had favorable words to say about nuclear power for most of the time that it has been in office, I am not a big fan of their effectiveness.

The California energy crisis occurred five years ago; the price of oil was less than $20 per barrel in 2001 and has increased by nearly 400% since. Coal prices have more than doubled, and natural gas prices have more than tripled during the Bush Administration. I do not necessarily blame the Administration for everything that caused these increases, but they should recognize them and understand how they change things for average Americans.

Even with positive words and all of those changes in our energy picture, there has still been little action and not a single application filed for a COL (yet).

I personally am quite frustrated that the GNEP is just one more change in direction that uses the same money that used to be dedicated to other programs like Gen IV.

Andy Kadak got it right in his July 10 piece titled DOE's Blurred Nuclear Vision where he described how all of the changes have resulted in a situation with lots of public relations announcements but little real progress.

Popular posts from this blog

A Design Team Pictures the Future of Nuclear Energy

For more than 100 years, the shape and location of human settlements has been defined in large part by energy and water. Cities grew up near natural resources like hydropower, and near water for agricultural, industrial and household use.

So what would the world look like with a new generation of small nuclear reactors that could provide abundant, clean energy for electricity, water pumping and desalination and industrial processes?

Hard to say with precision, but Third Way, the non-partisan think tank, asked the design team at the Washington, D.C. office of Gensler & Associates, an architecture and interior design firm that specializes in sustainable projects like a complex that houses the NFL’s Dallas Cowboys. The talented designers saw a blooming desert and a cozy arctic village, an old urban mill re-purposed as an energy producer, a data center that integrates solar panels on its sprawling flat roofs, a naval base and a humming transit hub.

In the converted mill, high temperat…

Sneak Peek

There's an invisible force powering and propelling our way of life.
It's all around us. You can't feel it. Smell it. Or taste it.
But it's there all the same. And if you look close enough, you can see all the amazing and wondrous things it does.
It not only powers our cities and towns.
And all the high-tech things we love.
It gives us the power to invent.
To explore.
To discover.
To create advanced technologies.
This invisible force creates jobs out of thin air.
It adds billions to our economy.
It's on even when we're not.
And stays on no matter what Mother Nature throws at it.
This invisible force takes us to the outer reaches of outer space.
And to the very depths of our oceans.
It brings us together. And it makes us better.
And most importantly, it has the power to do all this in our lifetime while barely leaving a trace.
Some people might say it's kind of unbelievable.
They wonder, what is this new power that does all these extraordinary things?

Seeing the Light on Nuclear Energy

If you think that there is plenty of electricity, that the air is clean enough and that nuclear power is a just one among many options for meeting human needs, then you are probably over-focused on the United States or Western Europe. Even then, you’d be wrong.

That’s the idea at the heart of a new book, “Seeing the Light: The Case for Nuclear Power in the 21st Century,” by Scott L. Montgomery, a geoscientist and energy expert, and Thomas Graham Jr., a retired ambassador and arms control expert.

Billions of people live in energy poverty, they write, and even those who don’t, those who live in places where there is always an electric outlet or a light switch handy, we need to unmake the last 200 years of energy history, and move to non-carbon sources. Energy is integral to our lives but the authors cite a World Health Organization estimate that more than 6.5 million people die each year from air pollution.  In addition, they say, the global climate is heading for ruinous instability. E…