Skip to main content

Nuclear Energy Industry to Play Role in Historic Trade Mission

U.S. Under Secretary of Commerce for International Trade Frank Levin announced at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce yesterday afternoon that he will lead a business development mission to India later this month. The mission, the largest of its kind ever led by the federal government, will include 238 participants representing 186 U.S. companies.

The Nuclear Energy Institute assisted the Department of Commerce and the U.S.-India Business Council with organizing events during the mission and encouraging participation in the mission by members of the U.S. nuclear energy industry. Currently, 18 companies comprise the nuclear energy delegation scheduled to travel to India for this historic summit.

Last week, the Senate approved the U.S.-India Civil Nuclear Cooperation agreement that will allow the United States to send nuclear fuel and technology to India.

President Bush said “…this partnership will help India meet its energy needs without increasing air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.”

In a statement released by the State Department, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said, “Successful implementation of the civil nuclear initiative is a key element of a new strategic partnership between the United States and India. This initiative will help India meet its growing energy needs, enhance cooperation on energy security and nonproliferation, and increase economic investment opportunities.”


Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Power, Energy, Technology, Politics, Environment, Electricity, India, Department of Commerce, U.S.-India Business Council.

Comments

gunter said…
Hi,

NEI is complicite in the violation of of international law as prescribed by the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Gunter, NIRS
Paul Primavera said…
Gunter,

There is no NPF treat violation. We're sharing civilian technology and civilian fuel. As India gets richer and more energy independent via nuclear energy, stability in the region is enhanced and the chances of a nuclear armed conflict reduced.

Isn't that what you really want? Or does NIRS prefer Indians and Pakistanis exist in the squalor of filth and decay that lack of electricity will surely cause?

I say help the Pakistanis, too. The more nuke power plants, the better.
gunter said…
... and Indian is now suspected of sharing nuclear technology with Iran. The Bush Administration has not answered to these intelligency reports.
Paul Primavera said…
Gunter,

What's wrong with Iran from developing commercial nuclear power? While I initially disagreed with Rod Adams about this at his Atomic Insights blog, why shouldn't every country have the ability to enrich its own uranium and reprocess its own spent fuel? True, I don't want the mad mullahs of Iran with the 'bomb', but the more we help these countries prosper economically (e.g., by nuclear power), the less willing they will be to sacrifice their wealth and prosperity on needless wars of aggression. No one wins in a nuke war, and those with the most wealth lose even more. So let me reverse my stance on Iran for a moment and argue in the words of the former German Chancellor: give peace a chance and let's help Iran, India and Pakistan. Heck, maybe they can even help stabilize Iraq and we can bring our troops home. Wouldn't that be great?

BTW, Entergy just announced that Indian Point Units 2 and 3 will be seeking license extension. They may well be operating and making electricity well after you and I are gone from this Earth. I for one hope so. My 2 year old son has asthma and less air pollution is always in best.

May God bless you, and have a Happy Thanksgiving!

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…