Skip to main content

The "Conversation" About Nuclear Energy

Want to know what public attitudes are like in one of the most anti-nuclear energy regions in the world? Just take a listen to a few minutes of yesterday's edition of The Conversation, a program on KUOW-FM 94.9 in Seattle. Click here (MP3) or here (Real Audio) to listen.

I understand that the region has its own problematic history with nuclear energy, but that's no excuse for some of the nonsense that the host, Guy Nelson, who immediately repeats an utter falsehood about total lifecycle emissions and nuclear energy. After listening for a few minutes, I was impressed with the bravery of a number of listeners who called to make the case for nuclear energy.

Comments

Anonymous said…
It's too bad that anti-nuke nutcases actually convince some people by using arguments against the 1970s era power plants or even out-and-out lies like in this case. The fact is nobody wants more 1970s type nuke plants. They were too expensive to build and the technology has improved by leaps and bounds since then.

Being pro-nuke means being against using foreign oil (our gas guzzling cars), against sulphur and other poisons in the air (coal plants), against carbon emissions that will destroy this planet and everyone on it (natural gas power plants), and against power supply problems like brownouts and blackouts.

With new designs like pebble bed reactors there is no possibility of melt-down because even with a complete coolant failure the reactor reaches thermal equilibrium. And the pebble bed reactor is modular so most parts can be mass produced and shipped to the site, and a community can start with a small reactor and add additional reactors as their power needs grow.

Other new reactor designs will enable cheaper hydrogen production by producing steam of high enough temperature to separate the hydrogen from seawater.

Nuclear power has never been more needed than right now. Mankind faces great peril (or extinction) without it.

Popular posts from this blog

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...

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...