Skip to main content

Taking On Raitt, Nash and Browne on Nuclear Energy

I'm sure by now many of you have seen the video produced by NukeFree.org, starring Bonnie Raitt, Graham Nash and Jackson Browne -- some original no-nukers -- asking Congress to alter language in legislation that makes provisions for loan guarantees supporting new nuclear plant construction. Click here for a CNN op-ed.

Here at NEI we had a good laugh over some of their claims and decided to do something about it. So I got together with Elizabeth King, NEI's manager for economic policy -- it's safe to say she's a loan guarantee expert -- to record the following video response:



Perhaps we should be cheered that others have seen the video, and are less than impressed.

UPDATE: More folks who are less than impressed with what they've seen:

The Fourth Checkraise
The Pajamahadin
Instapundit

We should probably note that it was Rod Adams who had us pegged first. Click here too.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Here's an interesting wrinkle: The CNN.com commentary that the musicians and Harvey Wasserman wrote is now closed to comments. I submitted an edited version of our video to them as a response. I wonder if they'll use it.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Ladies and Gentlemen ...

I am proud to present COAL AID 2007 - Keep America's Coal Industry Growing!

About Coal Aid:
Working to keep family miners in their coal mines, COAL AID brings together old music-industry has-beens, who haven't had a hit in years, and fresh young faces, eager to join the celebrity activist clique, to guarantee plenty of coal-fired electricity is available to you. COAL AID's mission is to build a vibrant fossil-fuel centered system of electricity generation in America.
Anonymous said…
Nice to see many responses on the CNN website chastising Raitt, et al., for not knowing a darn thing about the matter. With any luck, Raitt et al., will realize the public is better informed this time around, and it's time to drop the histrionics in favor of sound, reasoned policy.
Anonymous said…
Loved this one... "Bonnie Rait on Nuclear Energy is alright... but what I'm really looking for is a piece on Nanotechnology by Reba McEntire."
Unknown said…
It sounded to me like our friend Harvey "literally propounds a utopian fantasy as energy policy" Wasserman was behind their talking points. But I was thoroughly heartened by the incredulous tone of the comments- it seems the public may really be coming around.
Anonymous said…
Speaking of Wasserman, here's his rebuttal to Elizabeth King's video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOjjCWzcj_A
Basically, he has three points:

1. Nuclear power is uneconomical
2. Nuclear power plants are a safety risk due to terrorism, design problems, and human incompetence
3. There is no solution to nuclear waste

Given my own area of expertise, I'm sure that RosEnergoAtom will be taken by surprise by all three of these "facts"- or Wasserman's claim that the first nuclear power plant opened in 1957 (Every Soviet schoolchild knows that the world's first atomic power plant was built in the USSR in 1954!).
Anonymous said…
Where's her guitar?

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...

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

Several weeks ago Joshua Pearce at Clarion University in Pennsylvania released a study titled “ Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy deployment as a greenhouse gas mitigation technology .” In the study he stated... nuclear energy production would have to increase by 10.5% per year from 2010 to 2050 to both replace fossil-fuel-energy use and meet the future energy demands. This line, of course, made the headlines and has been picked up by several outlets and blogs . When looking into his calculations for this statement, he made one assumption error that overstated the above sentence by nearly a factor of three. Page 121, Section 4.1 of the study states: Richard Smalley pointed out that in 2004, the global economy consumed the equivalent of 220 million barrels of oil per day, which converted into electricity terms is the equivalent of 14.5 TeraWatts (TW), or 14,500,000 MegaWatts (MW) (2005). … With a nuclear plant having about 1000 MW (1 GW) of capacity, we would need 14,500...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...