On Al Gore and the Future of Nuclear Energy

Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore is in Australia promoting his documentary, An Inconvenient Truth. Over at the World Nuclear Organization blog, Ian Hore-Lacy has some dissenting thoughts.

For more on the nuclear energy debate in Australia, click here.

Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Power, Energy, Technology, Environment, Electricity, GHG, Al Gore, An Inconvenient Truth, Australia

Comments

Brian Mays said…

Hmm ... are these reporters recycling old stories and quotes (sound bites?) or is Gore just reading from the same cue card over and over?

"Nuclear power plants are the costliest to build and they take the longest time and at present they come in only one size — extra large."

It seems to me that I've heard these words before.

Wait! News flash! The situation has become more serious: apparently "at stake is nothing less than the survival of human civilisation!"

Well, grand hyperbole aside, to read this I would think the we could use a few more "extra large," emission-free 1000 MW, 1500 MW, and 1600 MW nuclear power plants. Don't you think?

Costly, you say? Well, exactly how much is "human civilisation" worth to you?

That's what's so sad about Gore. I realize that he's nothing but a politician, playing political games, but he's not even a good politician. He's not dynamic, he's stiff, he uses ridiculous, overblown rhetoric ("moral issue" and whatnot), and he leaves no room for compromise. His position on nuclear — which should be clear to anyone reading this article from Australia is in the "anti" camp — is just another example of his pathetic environmentalist hogwash, taken straight off of the scripts of various Green Left organizations.

Unless he starts promoting some real solutions — something other than "join Kyoto," which will accomplish almost nothing, since many countries who have signed the treaty are not going to meet their commitments — then he has done nothing. Well, I suppose if you have a vested interest in selling solar panels or Toyota Prius cars, then he has done something for you, but other than that ... ?

November 21, 2006 at 6:11 PM

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...

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

Several weeks ago Joshua Pearce at Clarion University in Pennsylvania released a study titled “ Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy deployment as a greenhouse gas mitigation technology .” In the study he stated... nuclear energy production would have to increase by 10.5% per year from 2010 to 2050 to both replace fossil-fuel-energy use and meet the future energy demands. This line, of course, made the headlines and has been picked up by several outlets and blogs . When looking into his calculations for this statement, he made one assumption error that overstated the above sentence by nearly a factor of three. Page 121, Section 4.1 of the study states: Richard Smalley pointed out that in 2004, the global economy consumed the equivalent of 220 million barrels of oil per day, which converted into electricity terms is the equivalent of 14.5 TeraWatts (TW), or 14,500,000 MegaWatts (MW) (2005). … With a nuclear plant having about 1000 MW (1 GW) of capacity, we would need 14,500...

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...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog