Skip to main content

Linking Electricity To Human Life

Paul Genoa, NEI’s Director of Policy Development, has posted to The National Journal’s Copenhagen Insider blog. This is the entire post, but do pay a visit over to The National Journal for all the latest at COP15. Here is Mr. Genoa’s post:

Reducing poverty and human suffering in the least developed countries is the right thing to do from an ethical/moral perspective, and it is in everyone’s own strategic self interest. Throughout human history, extreme poverty has led to war and environmental destruction. Lands are deforested, top soil eroded and villages plundered.

It is in the interest of the developed countries to do what they can to avoid these environmental and security threats through effective development assistance. Because climate change will only make a bad problem worse for most of these countries, we need to step-up our global greenhouse gas mitigation efforts and help these countries adapt to future changes in the world’s climate.

There is a direct correlation between access to electricity and both the quality and longevity of human life. Electrification directly alleviates poverty through providing clean drinking water, refrigeration of food and medicines, and by expanding education and productivity. In many developed nations, the transition to clean electric technology began in the 1970s when they significantly expanded nuclear energy as one response to the Middle East oil embargo. This effectively displaced the use of oil in the electricity system for many of these countries.

The United States and other developed countries can help developing nations most by first reducing their own GHG emissions by rapidly deploying a portfolio of clean energy technologies, including nuclear energy and renewable energy. Electrification in the least developed countries can be accelerated through distributed renewable resources.

In addition to the humanitarian benefits, development assistance to these countries should be thought of as a long-term business development opportunity. We can build sustained trading partnerships over time, exporting U.S. clean energy technology while creating quality jobs at home. As they say, we can do well by doing good

Comments

Russia's floating nuclear reactors could be the quickest way to electrify third world nations that have marine coastlines.

Marcel F. Williams

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 …

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…

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…