Skip to main content

A Tarantula As Big As a House

Well, we just don’t know. (click on pictures or here to see full size versions):

greenpeacebunny

greenpeaceelephant

These are ads created in Romania for Greenpeace and, although these are in English, they may be intended for Eastern Europe.

Mutations? Really? This went out of style after Universal Pictures grew tired of growing tarantulas and praying mantises to the size of houses in the 1950s.

Greenpeace can make all the arguments against nuclear energy they want, but dishonestly leads to a loss of credibility. We can’t imagine Greenpeace USA using these ads, but if this is their response to the vastly increased interest in nuclear energy in Europe, this is a battle they’re fated to lose.

Sheesh!

Comments

Jason Ribeiro said…
If you haven't seen this greenpeace commercial already, it has the same theme.

In terms of negative ad campaigning this is a despicable low blow. It comes from the nightmares of Greenpeace's leaders.
Anonymous said…
The unfortunate part is that other energy sources (such as coal, geothermal and even natural gas) release more radiation into the environment than nuclear -- but there is no warm/fuzzy way to demonstrate this that I can come up with.

Perhaps was is needed is a series of commercials, explaining the limitations of each renewable proposed by Greenpeace, each type in turn.

Let's begin with wind. The local weather forcaster in Texas is on TV talking about high temperatures. The guy watching TV comments about how hot it is in the room, and asks his wife to switch on the air conditioner. As she does, the picture cuts away to some wind turbines spinning down as the voice of the forcaster also mentions the calm winds. Just as the air conditioner comes on, the power goes off and everything shuts down.

The commercial ends as a narrator states that while wind can be used to generate supplimental power, nuclear can provide clean, safe power even on hot afternoons when the wind doesn't blow.
Jason Ribeiro said…
I like your thinking donb. The nuclear industry does have a social intellectual problem to wrangle with in getting its message out. Your example shows how capacity factor can be explained without mentioning the phrase 'capacity factor' which would lose most people.

I also like the idea of doing a few low budget for the web only mini-infomercials. With a few people taking a few moments to explain and talk about nuclear topics with 3-10 minutes, you could do a lot that you couldn't with a normal tv spot. Maybe a few news clips might run them on broadcast TV as well if they attract attention.
Finrod said…
"I also like the idea of doing a few low budget for the web only mini-infomercials. With a few people taking a few moments to explain and talk about nuclear topics with 3-10 minutes, you could do a lot that you couldn't with a normal tv spot."

Hmm. I have a Geiger counter and a deep voice. Unfortunately I as yet have nothing to measure with the Geiger counter, and if I've ever been described as photogenic, it was by a good-natured liar in poor lighting.
My goodness. I live and attend school in Chicago, so there are frequently Greenpeacers on the street corners wanting to stop me. On the occasion that I do stop, I let them know that I can't support Greenpeace because of their official stance against nuclear. One guy told me that personally, he supports nuclear. Another girl tried say that Greenpeace is not anti-nuclear at all! I just walked away at that joke.

I don't know what to say about this. They're preying on decades-passed, unfounded fears about nuclear power and inventing issues. I think the only caveats left in the US are the start-up capital and waste storage.
rsynnott said…
Remember their ad with the plane hitting Sizewell B? In terms of silliness, this is nothing out of the ordinary for Greenpeace.
Joffan said…
Greenpeace's contribution to the first European Nuclear Energy Forum meeting was also cartoonish (including inflatable Homer Simpson) and belligerently dogmatic in nature. You can find it in the "presentations" zip file on that site.

Popular posts from this blog

Fluor Invests in NuScale

You know, it’s kind of sad that no one is willing to invest in nuclear energy anymore. Wait, what? NuScale Power celebrated the news of its company-saving $30 million investment from Fluor Corp. Thursday morning with a press conference in Washington, D.C. Fluor is a design, engineering and construction company involved with some 20 plants in the 70s and 80s, but it has not held interest in a nuclear energy company until now. Fluor, which has deep roots in the nuclear industry, is betting big on small-scale nuclear energy with its NuScale investment. "It's become a serious contender in the last decade or so," John Hopkins, [Fluor’s group president in charge of new ventures], said. And that brings us to NuScale, which had run into some dark days – maybe not as dark as, say, Solyndra, but dire enough : Earlier this year, the Securities Exchange Commission filed an action against NuScale's lead investor, The Michael Kenwood Group. The firm "misap...

Wednesday Update

From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin...

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

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...