Followup on Alec Baldwin and the Oyster Creek "Symposium"

Some of our friends from around the Blogosphere have picked up on our story from Friday on Alec Baldwin's participation in a symposium organized by anti-nuclear activists who want to close the Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Plant in New Jersey.

Over at We Support Lee, Ruth Sponsler is wondering why the Rutgers School of Law is involved in such a partisan exercise.

Carter Wood at NAM Blog has a slightly different take:

Despite the paucity of facts in Baldwin's opposition to clean and safe nuclear energy, it's wrong to make fun of him. After all, unlike most actors, he has first-hand experience with nuclear power, safely shepherding a defecting Soviet nuclear sub into American control back in 1984. That's an insight few of us can bring to the debate.

Indeed.

Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Environment, Energy, Politics, Technology, Economics, Alec Baldwin, New Jersey, Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Plant

Comments

Anonymous said…

A bit off topic, but some readers may want to chime in to the current discussion at

www.willyoujoinus.com

cheers

December 11, 2006 at 3:06 PM

Anonymous said…

How could Rutgers legally exclude anyone or any group from a symposium at a taxpayer-supported institution?

December 12, 2006 at 12:06 PM

Anonymous said…

A better question might be whether Rutgers Law Clinic was in violation of the DMCA by showing those Simpsons clips at their event without permission from 20th century Fox, or for that matter, why they chose to show those clips in the first place?

December 14, 2006 at 9:23 PM

Anonymous said…

LMAO at Carter's comment -- perfect.

December 14, 2006 at 9:24 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...

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