Skip to main content

Introducing Left Atomics

For a long time now, we've contended that nuclear energy shouldn't be a left/right issue. Thanks to folks like N. Nadir, we've found that there are folks who agree.

Make room for one more: Left Atomics:
Left Atomics is a group of left activists: socialists, progressives, Marxists, etc., who believe that nuclear energy can be a positive force for humanity. We propose that the Left, broadly speaking, should support, not oppose, nuclear energy.

We will be posting here a Manifesto for Nuclear Energy that we hope can be the basis of a discussion on the left among pro- and anti-nuclear activists. We feel that by and large there has been only knee-jerk opposition to nuclear energy by the left. Few have re-examined the technology of nuclear power production, the enormous changes that have been made in operating safely old plants since 3 Mile Island and Chernobyl and the newer Generation III plants currently under construction or being proposed.
Count us as another party ready to engage in some meaningful dialogue. Welcome to the debate.

Thanks to Rod Adams for the pointer.

CORRECTION: The link to N. Nadir's diary on DailyKos has been corrected.


Anonymous said…
Is this group funded by the industry, a la CASEnergy?
Anonymous said…
Eric: You have the wrong link for me. My diaries at Kos - most of which are about nuclear power but also discuss other subjects - embrace the perspectives shared by many Democrats, can be found here:

I am advising Democrats that many of their goals depend upon having clean safe energy and that the cleanest and safest energy available in nuclear energy.

I certainly hope I'm not being included among the Marxists or Socialists, since I am neither and have explicitly stated as much over at DKos. Frankly I don't have much patience in any case for arguments about social systems and whether nuclear power alone among energy systems must solve structural social problems.

Generally I am suspicious of labels, since almost all of them generate knee-jerk reactions. Some words of this type are "progressive," "liberatarian," "free marketeer" even words like "Democrat," "Republican," etc, even words like "environmentalist." Now, I will not tell you that I am above such reactions myself - I'm not - but it's sometimes less than useful.

I think that no matter how one identifies oneself, one must above all think critically. To think critically, among other things, one must examine the case itself rather than who is stating the case and how he or she is identified.

But your point is well taken. No part of the political or economic spectrum can ignore the benefits of nuclear energy. They are, or should be obvious at this point, obvious.

This is a time of dramatic change, I think, and we're going to see quite a bit of flux with the old labels and some surprising attitudes coming from some surprising people. There is really nothing wrong with that. If a formula doesn't fit a problem, it follows that the problem doesn't go away. Thus the formula, not the problem, needs to be changed. Put another way, more familiar to those with a scientific bent, if experiment doesn't fit theory, it is time to discard - or at least refine - the theory, not the experiment.

gunter said…
Should we expect to start seeing groups like "Atomic Power Enthusiast" (APE) or "Cocker Spaniel Owners for More Radioactive Waste"... what's your point?
Gunter, NIRS

Popular posts from this blog

Making Clouds for a Living

Donell Banks works at Southern Nuclear’s Plant Vogtle units 3 and 4 as a shift supervisor in Operations, but is in the process of transitioning to his newly appointed role as the daily work controls manager. He has been in the nuclear energy industry for about 11 years.

I love what I do because I have the unique opportunity to help shape the direction and influence the culture for the future of nuclear power in the United States. Every single day presents a new challenge, but I wouldn't have it any other way. As a shift supervisor, I was primarily responsible for managing the development of procedures and programs to support operation of the first new nuclear units in the United States in more than 30 years. As the daily work controls manager, I will be responsible for oversight of the execution and scheduling of daily work to ensure organizational readiness to operate the new units.

I envision a nuclear energy industry that leverages the technology of today to improve efficiency…

Nuclear: Energy for All Political Seasons

The electoral college will soon confirm a surprise election result, Donald Trump. However, in the electricity world, there are fewer surprises – physics and economics will continue to apply, and Republicans and Democrats are going to find a lot to like about nuclear energy over the next four years.

In a Trump administration, the carbon conversation is going to be less prominent. But the nuclear value proposition is still there. We bring steady jobs to rural areas, including in the Rust Belt, which put Donald Trump in office. Nuclear plants keep the surrounding communities vibrant.

We hold down electricity costs for the whole economy. We provide energy diversity, reducing the risk of disruption. We are a critical part of America’s industrial infrastructure, and the importance of infrastructure is something that President-Elect Trump has stressed.

One of our infrastructure challenges is natural gas pipelines, which have gotten more congested as extremely low gas prices have pulled m…

Nuclear Is a Long-Term Investment for Ohio that Will Pay Big

With 50 different state legislative calendars, more than half of them adjourn by June, and those still in session throughout the year usually take a recess in the summer. So springtime is prime time for state legislative activity. In the next few weeks, legislatures are hosting hearings and calling for votes on bills that have been battered back and forth in the capital halls.

On Tuesday, The Ohio Public Utilities Committee hosted its third round of hearings on the Zero Emissions Nuclear Resources Program, House Bill 178, and NEI’s Maria Korsnick testified before a jam-packed room of legislators.

Washingtonians parachuting into state debates can be a tricky platform, but in this case, Maria’s remarks provided national perspective that put the Ohio conundrum into context. At the heart of this debate is the impact nuclear plants have on local jobs and the local economy, and that nuclear assets should be viewed as “long-term investments” for the state. Of course, clean air and electrons …