David Neiwert has an interesting point to make about the environmental movement and its sometimes blinkered approach to the issues it addresses. The gist of his post is that there needs to be a balance between a recognition of the practical concerns of the people engaged in seemingly anti environmental activities and an unbridled idealism that labels divergent views as irredeemably evil. Nuclear energy has experienced some mind meltingly complex trips around the ideological circuit over the last several decades, and Neiwert neatly explicates how a focus on an (presumed) absolute good can lead to wrong-headedness, cultural blindness and social marginalization - even when right. Read the whole thing - it's better than this summary.
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...
Comments