Skip to main content

Diaries on Nuclear Energy at DailyKos

David Walters stirred up the debate with Charles Barton by discussing California's wind energy problems while adding in the benefits of nuclear plants. NNadir wrote A Comment On Whether Nuclear Energy Can Save Your Pathetic Butt in which tinhat7 wrote back saying he doesn't think so. Unfortunately for tinhat7, most of the votes agreed with NNadir.

Comments

Charles Barton said…
Actually David and I seemed to agree about the problems of wind power in California. The debate was with people who disagreed with David's Daily Kos post. centered around

David called my attention to the California Independent System Operator (CAISO) wind data. Since I had previously posted on the California summer wind problems, I generated another post to address problems revealed by the CAISO data.
http://nucleargreen.blogspot.com/2008/05/california-wind-fails-again.html

David posted about the same data on Daliy Kos, and quoted my post. Other people debated with David.

By the way, when are you guys going to link to "Nuclear Green"? I have been up for 6 months. Am I going to have to post pictures of naked women fondling reactors to get you guys to link to my blog?
David Bradish said…
Charles, I think I may have worded the post wrong. I didn't mean that you and Walters were debating each other, I meant Walters (along with your post) were debating the others. We'll get you up on our blog roll. Keep up the good work!
Anonymous said…
Does anyone know of a map that shows the footprint of a nuclear power plant compared to windmills providing the same energy? I saw that T. Boone Pickens is proposing a wind farm in Oklahoma that's 400,000 acres!!
David Bradish said…
We have an infographic displaying how much land would be needed from wind or solar to supply the US 20% of its electricity. A nuclear plant requires only one-square mile of land which would be a spec on the infographic. I haven't seen yet a map that has correctly displayed the footprint of a nuclear plant versus a windfarm of equivalent size.

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…

Nuclear Is a Long-Term Investment for Ohio that Will Pay Big

With 50 different state legislative calendars, more than half of them adjourn by June, and those still in session throughout the year usually take a recess in the summer. So springtime is prime time for state legislative activity. In the next few weeks, legislatures are hosting hearings and calling for votes on bills that have been battered back and forth in the capital halls.

On Tuesday, The Ohio Public Utilities Committee hosted its third round of hearings on the Zero Emissions Nuclear Resources Program, House Bill 178, and NEI’s Maria Korsnick testified before a jam-packed room of legislators.


Washingtonians parachuting into state debates can be a tricky platform, but in this case, Maria’s remarks provided national perspective that put the Ohio conundrum into context. At the heart of this debate is the impact nuclear plants have on local jobs and the local economy, and that nuclear assets should be viewed as “long-term investments” for the state. Of course, clean air and electrons …