Skip to main content

More Than 50 Nations Want to Build Nuclear Plants

That's according to IAEA's Hans-Holger Rogner:
More than 50 nations are in talks with the UN atomic watchdog to build nuclear power plants, a twofold increase over the last four years, a top agency official said in an interview released on Thursday.

"The IAEA is talking with 50-60 countries about the construction of nuclear power plants," Hans-Holger Rogner, head of planning and economic studies at the International Atomic Energy Agency, said in an interview with the German newsletter VDI Nachrichten.

"There were only half as many just four years ago. That's a sign of where the journey is headed," he said.
These are excellent signs that we on our planet want to go more and more nuclear. If I live long enough (hopefully to the end of this century), I bet we're going to continue to develop the Earth into the clean, awesome, sustainable planets like shown in the Star Wars movies. And that will be in part because nuclear plants will be providing much of the affordable, dense, clean baseload power for our planet to make it happen. I'm looking forward to it. :-)

Picture up top is of the Star Wars planet Naboo where 600 million people live, picture on bottom is of the Star Wars city planet Coruscant where "approximately 1 trillion people inhabit the planet". The picturesque planets are what I envision our Earth looking like as we harness more nuclear energy!

Comments

Ioannes said…
Dave,

Yours is a very nice sentiment. But before we can create a clean, safe planet with abundant resources at low cost available for all, we have to change our hearts. We have to become clean in our hearts first. That being said, I share your idealism for our future.

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…

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…