Wrapping It Up at Potential Energy

I love posts like this one from Gia Milinovich at Potential Energy:

When I started Potential Energy in May my secret hope was that I'd be able to find some kind of anti-nuclear info that stood up to scrutiny. I was hoping that I'’d uncover something that backed up all of those bad things I've heard about nuclear power my whole life.

I failed.

I don't know about anybody else, but I live for moments like this one. Here's her conclusion:

I would imagine a lot of previously anti-nuclear people would find it difficult to look at nuclear power without their pre-conceived ideas getting in the way. It wasn't very easy for me, but I forced myself to look at all of the issues in a way I never had before.

I started out leaning towards anti-nuclear and have become a supporter.

In the end, that's all our industry is really asking of folks -- just give us a chance to talk about our real record. Let us separate the science from the hysteria, and find some common ground where we can generate the electricity we need in a way that's affordable and environmentally sensitive.

Is nuclear the only answer? No, not by a longshot. But it ought to be a part of any answer that we come up with when it comes to confronting the challenges of energy policy.

One last note: I want to thank Gia, Kat and Caspar from Potential Energy for allowing us to participate in the debate. They promised to keep an open mind about nuclear energy, and they stuck with that promise. And thanks to all the readers from NEI Nuclear Notes who stopped by and contributed as well. And while we may not have completely convinced everybody, I'm grateful for their efforts.

Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Power, Energy, Technology, Environment, Electricity, United Kingdom

Comments

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