Skip to main content

Stewart Brand at NEA 2006

Back in February, I first mentioned that Stewart Brand, founder of the Whole Earth Catalog, would be addressing the 2006 Nuclear Energy Assembly in San Francisco, and now I'm finally able to share the video of his speech with you.



Brand was invited to address the assembly based on the article he wrote in 2005 for MIT Technology Review entitled, Environmental Heresies, where he endorsed an expanded use of nuclear energy as a way to provide abundant electric power while curbing greenhouse gas emissions.

In this speech, Brand speaks extensively about how the nuclear industry needs to interact with committed environmentalists in order to work with them toward common goals. The whole speech comes in at a little more than 27 minutes, but I can't recommend it strongly enough. Please take some time to watch it today.

Technorati tags: , , , , , , ,

Comments

Anonymous said…
Greetings,

Just a note on Brand's point regarding proliferation:

Brand makes his February 2006 pitch in the heat of the forging the India-US nuclear technology deal which intensifies and further destablizes the Pakistan/India nuclear arms race.

The Bush Administration in cutting this deal to help his "friends" in the nuclear industry has undermined and destabilized the NPT.

Sorry Stewart, but reality once again steps in on your dream where a "preponderance of evidence" shows that the spread of commercial nuclear technology simultaneous provides the building blocks for both the horizontal (number of possessors) and vertical (number of weapons) proliferation of the nuclear arms race.

The "finessing" of such a foundational issue, as Brands puts it, and is dishonest and uncuts the credibility of the "Nuclear Brand" of the "Stewart's Environmental Classification System."

As my daddy used to say "its like trying to put wings on a frog so he doesn't have to bump his ass."

Nuclear weapons and nuclear power are just the different sides to the same coin.

I concur the "abrupt climate change" is becoming ever more a concern. That's all the more reason why we dont want to waste more precious time and resource on this already demonstrated failed technology.
Anonymous said…
What huey...!

If you commercialize MOX and HEU for reactor fuel its incentive (or excuse) to put more weapons grade material into the production pipe line for more sophisticated bombs, not less. Simple law of supply and demand.

No enforcement to the NPT is a serious erosion and nuclear weapons will proliferate both in number of possessors and number of weapons.

Flash points for nuclear war like Kashmir are growing. Providing more nuclear technology pours fuel on the flames on these rivalries bringing the world closer to triggering nuclear war.

Popular posts from this blog

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

An Ohio School Board Is Working to Save Nuclear Plants

Ohio faces a decision soon about its two nuclear reactors, Davis-Besse and Perry, and on Wednesday, neighbors of one of those plants issued a cry for help. The reactors’ problem is that the price of electricity they sell on the high-voltage grid is depressed, mostly because of a surplus of natural gas. And the reactors do not get any revenue for the other benefits they provide. Some of those benefits are regional – emissions-free electricity, reliability with months of fuel on-site, and diversity in case of problems or price spikes with gas or coal, state and federal payroll taxes, and national economic stimulus as the plants buy fuel, supplies and services. Some of the benefits are highly localized, including employment and property taxes. One locality is already feeling the pinch: Oak Harbor on Lake Erie, home to Davis-Besse. The town has a middle school in a building that is 106 years old, and an elementary school from the 1950s, and on May 2 was scheduled to have a referendu

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