Skip to main content

Black Is the New Green


We don't read USA Today as much as we might - too colorful, ink doesn't adhere to our hands - but a story on coal and Peabody Energy was full of interesting content and can be found on the web here. This popped out at us:
"There's a perception out there that coal is dirty, and we have to change that," he [Chairman and CEO Gregory Boyce] adds, noting that coal plants already have cut emissions of some pollutants and boosted efficiency to slash CO2 discharges. "Black is the new green."
Now, we know what you're thinking, but read the whole article first, then think again and - er, share in comments, won't you?

Picture of Anthracite. Pretty, isn't it?

Comments

gunter said…
"Black is the new green" makes about as much sense as "inherently safe nuclear power."
Kirk Sorensen said…
Wrong again Gunter.

Nuclear power doesn't use our atmosphere as its waste pool, and your work to undermine nuclear power is indirectly responsible for keeping coal power front and center for the last 30 years.

I'm hoping you won't "keep up the (bad) work". But you probably will.
Brian Mays said…
Ah, I understand, Mr. Gunter.

It makes about as much sense as describing NIRS as an accurate "information resource service" about anything nuclear.

And yet, once again, NIRS defends coal. At least Mr. Gunter and NIRS are consistent when it comes to this issue.

Please tell me, Mr. Gunter, who funds NIRS, and who pays your salary?
gunter said…
Kirk and Brian,

You guys really are delusional just like "black is the new green."

Isn't it the boards of directors of the thermoelectric industry (coal and nuclear, primarily)that are directly responsible for keeping coal front and center?

The antinuclear movement doesn't chair Dominion, Duke, DTE, etc, etc, etc, that manage and burn coal and fission uranium.

You aren't suggesting that companies like Dominion have a plan to phase out new and old coal plants with new reactor construction? To the contrary, they plan to remove more mountain tops AND mine more uranium.

Anyways, I thought you folks had concluded that the oil companies are paying my salary? Now you're saying Peabody Coal sends me checks, too?

:)LOL...get a grip or lighten up...
Kirk Sorensen said…
Now you're saying Peabody Coal sends me checks, too?

Wow, I guess you just work for free then. Even more baffling.

(Don't) keep up the (bad) work, Gunter.
Brian Mays said…
Delusional, Mr. Gunter?

I'm just asking a question. You could clear up any "delusions" immediately by simply answering my question in a straightforward, honest manner.

The front page of your organization's own website states that "NIRS relies on contributions from people who use and/or appreciate our services for 1/3 of our annual budget." (link) (Google cache)

So my question is the following: Where does the other 2/3 of your budget come from? Who is giving you that money?

Everybody knows that the NEI is an industry trade association. Everybody knows who funds it (i.e., companies in the nuclear industry). There are no secrets; it's all transparent and obvious. (Note: I am not and never have been an employee of the NEI.)

I have tried to find a record of your sources of funding, but have failed. Perhaps you can point me to where this is published?

If your organization has not released this information, then the natural question that follows is what do you have to hide?

Unless your organization and your parent organizations, such as WISE, are willing to be as transparent as the NEI, why should anyone not assume that there is some sort of ulterior motive behind everything that you write here? Why should anyone take you seriously?

Feel free to answer any of my questions, Mr. Gunter. Thank you.

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 …