Skip to main content

Should Democrats Embrace Nuclear Energy?

For Daily Kos diarist bryfry, the answer is yes:
Now is the time for Democrats to champion real solutions (note: that's plural; there are more than one solution) that don't require fossil fuels. Nobody is saying that efficiency, conservation, or renewables should be discarded. On the contrary, they are absolutely essential. But to leave out nuclear energy -- the one energy source that has proven itself in the US, in France, in Japan, and is today proving itself in over 400 currently operating reactors worldwide -- is simply ludicrous.

Democrats should say yes to nuclear energy. Now is the chance to provide real answers to one of the most important questions of our time: how will we live and where will the energy come from? The opportunity is too great to pass up.
For more, read this Boston Globe op ed from John Dyson and Matt Bennett.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Please, nuclear is not safe since it leaves
radioactive refuse, in many instances in places
that don't want it or are so poor and willing to
accept it. Where will you be in 25,000 years
to see if the systems determined to last,
didn't break down? Also given our world of
terrorism, why not build more targets?

MIT determined that two geo thermal plants
could be built within a few years...one on each
coast, at the cost of 2.9 billion dollars that would
produce 24X the amount of electricity currently
used. This is a minimal cost compared to its
production, as well as having no deleterious
effect on the environment now or in the
future. I know they say it can make faults
more vulnerable, but how about not building
on one, such as occurred with previous
nuclear plants. Nuclear plants have been gone for 30 years for a reason. It is like resuscitating
Frankenstein. We don't want them, they are the
dinosaur of the past. Give true green a chance,
and new industries that promote the well-being
of our citizens. Green and nuclear are an
oxymoron, outrageous that you would support
this issue.

Popular posts from this blog

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...

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...

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

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...