SUNY to Investigate Nuclear Energy Curriculum

State Assemblyman Joel Miller of Poughkeepsie has proposed a college curriculum be developed to train students in the field of nuclear energy.

Miller, a Poughkeepsie Republican, met recently with State University of New York officials to discuss his proposal to establish a school or curriculum along with other colleges and private businesses, to offer courses in nuclear science, nuclear engineering, civil engineering and other related fields.

“It will not only produce the people we need to advance into the nuclear age, which we have been hiding from for the last 35 years, but it also advances medicine. It would be very good for the economy of New York State,” he said.

Miller, who noted officials of Indian Point owner Entergy were at the meeting, said his idea was well-taken by the SUNY officials.

Comments

Anonymous said…

Look at slide 22 at:

http://www.ny.gov/governor/press/UnfinishedBusinessPP.pdf

Gov Elliot Spitzer calls nuclear dirty energy. look at what's on his clean energy list and tell me he's not getting money from natural gas and "clean coal".

He'll never allow SUNY to teach nuclear engineering unless it's to shut down Indian Point.

As long as you vote Democrat, these are the kinds of people whom you put into office.

October 10, 2007 at 7:02 AM

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...

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...

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...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog