Skip to main content

Diaries on Nuclear Energy at DailyKos

By
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.
Labels:

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?
May 23, 2008 at 11:12 AM
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!
May 23, 2008 at 11:20 AM
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!!
May 23, 2008 at 1:59 PM
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.
May 23, 2008 at 5:39 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

By
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...
23 comments
Read more

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

By
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...
6 comments
Read more

Nuclear Utility Moves Up in Credit Ratings, Bank is "Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy"

By
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...
Post a Comment
Read more