Skip to main content

Atomic Insights: Don't Give Up on the Anti-Nukes

By Eric McErlain
After reading the latest nonsense from groups like Greenpeace and the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, it's hard not to despair that those groups will ever abandon their religious opposition to nuclear energy.

But Rod Adams has another idea:
I know that most of you think that there is no hope of changing the positions taken by these groups - and others like them - but we are doomed to failure if we do not try. Make every effort you can to contact the groups and let them know how you feel about their continuing illogical position regarding nuclear fission in a world whose very survival may be threatened by continued burning of increasingly massive quantities of fossil fuel.group.
I guess if Patrick Moore can change, perhaps we shouldn't give up on anybody.
Labels:

Comments

Anonymous said…
I have found many people spouting the same dogma throughout the bloggosphere, and I don't think it's possible to reason with them. Some have even admitted that if it comes to it, they'd rather mankind slide back into the middle ages than develop nuclear power.

I don't think we're doomed if we fail to convince these folks. Sure their groups enjoy a lot of popular support, but that support evaporates the instant the rolling blackouts start. You'll notice that when a power capacity crunch actually hits, these groups go silent. That won't continue to be a successful strategy; power plants of some sort will have to be built. Eventually these groups will have nowhere to hide - it'll be put up or shut up time. The dogma won't survive being put to the reality test.
February 6, 2007 at 11:07 AM
Anonymous said…
I wonder if they still applying those "Split Wood - Not Atoms" bumper stickers when they buy an electic car?

Whenever I see one of those bumper stickers I think of all of the people that have been killed by the use of wood stoves and fireplaces. Then again, maybe that is the whole point of the bumper sticker. Psuedo-evironmentalist dogma holds that fewer people are better for the environment. Usually they aren't specific about how to get rid of the millions of people who they want to eliminate.

By the way, Harry Reid has just complained about "tax money" being used for continuing development of the Yucca Mountain beneficial solution.
February 7, 2007 at 9:35 AM
Anonymous said…
People who advocate splitting wood not atoms are causing global warming in two ways. First, they're burning a carbon-based fuel that releases GHGs into the biosphere. Second, by cutting down trees, they're removing CO2 absorbers and oxygen generators. I'd say advocates of wood power are far more environmentally irresponsible than nuclear advocates.
February 8, 2007 at 9:09 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Wednesday Update

By
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...
Post a Comment
Read more

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

By
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...
23 comments
Read more

Nuclear Utility Moves Up in Credit Ratings, Bank is "Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy"

By
Some positive signs that nuclear utilities can continue to receive positive ratings even while they finance new nuclear plants for the first time in decades: Wells Fargo upgrades SCANA to Outperform from Market Perform Wells analyst says, "YTD, SCG shares have underperformed the Regulated Electrics (total return +2% vs. +9%). Shares trade at 11.3X our 10E EPS, a modest discount to the peer group median of 11.8X. We view the valuation as attractive given a comparatively constructive regulatory environment and potential for above-average long-term EPS growth prospects ... Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy. SCG plans to participate in the development of two regulated nuclear units at a cost of $6.3B, raising legitimate concerns regarding financing and construction. We have carefully considered the risks and are comfortable with SCG’s strategy based on a highly constructive political & regulatory environment, manageable financing needs stretched out over 10 years, strong partners...
Post a Comment
Read more