Skip to main content

The Party (x 2) Is Over

By
Now that the Democrats and Republicans have wrapped up their party conventions, let's review, shall we?

We heard from Senator McCain and Governor Palin a full endorsement of nuclear energy - it's in in the Republican mix without caveats - McCain even dinged Obama for not being a heartier supporter. (We spotlight the nuclear references in all the speeches a few posts down.)

Senators Obama and Biden, meanwhile, hedged on somewhat amorphous safety issues. We can let you speculate on the reasons for this; we'd guess Democrats are following the lead of the environmental wing of the party, although even that subset has softened considerably on nuclear in the last several years.

But the most striking thing is that all the major candidates voiced support for nuclear energy. This is the year nuclear energy got its long-deserved seat at the post-partisan dinner table (with perhaps no dessert from the Democrats) and no longer has to live in the dusty, locked attic with crazy Uncle Ernie. It's a signal change.

---

Last week, we pointed you to some ads NEI whipped up for the Democratic Convention version of The National Journal. Well, wouldn't you know - NEI did the same for the Republicans, too. Here's the link. They're the top-most items in the list.

Balloons. Amusingly, some of the floor reporters at last night's Republican National Convention wrap-up got swamped in the things.
Labels:

Comments

Anonymous said…
I still won't vote Democrat. Not then. Not now. Not ever.
September 6, 2008 at 4:41 PM
Anonymous said…
BTW, General Electric has gotten so many complaints about the liberal democrat bias of what passes for NBC that it is replacing Marxists Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews as news anchors. Seems like GE (partner of GE-Hitachi, maker of the ESBWR) is beginning to realize that GE-NBC has to be reigned in. Elect Obama and you can expect an anti-nuke for NRC chairman and an anti-nuke for DOE secretary. You NEI folks won't listen to me. You prefer to ingratiate yourselves with the liberals. That'll be your own undoing.
September 8, 2008 at 10:16 AM
Joffan said…
Well, if we're getting political, it seems the Republicans will solve any power supply problems by continuing to bankrupt the country, so there'll be no industry or commerce that needs power. McCain is just more Bush. If you liked the last eight years, well, I guess you'll vote McCain.

Obama has been circumspect but positive (for a campaigning Democrat) about nuclear power. I think he'll be OK for nuclear once in the White House.
September 9, 2008 at 1:13 PM
Professor Dan(a) said…
Where is the report on the third-party candidates? I know that Ron Paul is a nuclear supporter, and he just endorsed the third-party candidates who are still running. Bob Barr, for one, is a strong supporter of nuclear. If nuclear power is a top issue for people like us, maybe voting neither Republican nor Democrat would be the way to go.
September 10, 2008 at 8:28 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

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

By
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...
7 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