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

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...

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...

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...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog