Skip to main content

The Japan Quake, Nuclear Energy and the Daily Kos

By Eric McErlain
As you might imagine, I've been monitoring a lot of stories from around the Web about the situation in Japan. And as you might surmise, while an incident like this is always a cause for concern, it's not a cause for hysteria -- unless of course we're talking about the usual suspects.

One of the more egregious examples out there right now has to be this diary over at Daily Kos that mixes just enough truth with anti-nuke talking points to drum up all the fear and hysteria you might need.

But then again, even in the wake of the over the top analysis, there are a number of readers who are digging in and fighting back. Here are a few samples:
First, allow me to qualify my post by saying that I find the parent diary to be a fairly obnoxious throwback to the type of thinking from the 1970s that bought us another 30 years worth of CO2-spewing coal power, and the fact that it rocketed to the top of the recommended list speaks to Kossack's relative lack of detached analysis on the topic.

[...]

Waste disposal is expensive, yes, but its danger is highly overstated.

First, any byproducts that last for "thousands of years" aren't very radioactive to begin with (otherwise they would disintegrate much faster).

Also, you make it sound like nuclear waste gets dumped in streams, like mine tailings. It doesn't. The Yucca Mountain site was chosen for its geological stability and isolation from groundwater. The relative mass of spent nucler fuel (compared to say, coal slag) is tiny.

We have a similar plan in Canada in the works, basically to bury it a mile deep in a formation that hasn't moved for millions of years. The biggest obstacle to getting it done right now is public acceptance.

[...]

Two hundred have been killed in a Brazilian jetliner crash.

How many people are killed in coal mines every year? How many are injured, maimed or killed on offshore drilling platforms or by gas pipeline explosions, or are hit by coal trains?

What kinds of poisons leach out from the mines; from the oil fields, from the fly-ash disposal pits. What happens when petroleum coke is burned?

We ignore the dangers of everyday life and then use speculation as evidence that nuclear power is unsafe.
There's plenty more where those came from. If you choose to stop by and participate in the debate, please be courteous.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Fluor Invests in NuScale

By
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...
1 comment
Read more

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

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