Skip to main content

Mom and Pop Ponder Nuclear Energy

By
We admit that we’ve read a lot of interesting approaches to supporting (and not supporting) nuclear energy, but this piece by Neil Russo in the Weymouth (Mass.) News is certainly unique. Here’s how he starts out:
Here's the vanilla loaf cake from Eb, Mom, he put walnuts in it because he knows how much you like walnuts. Put the kettle on and let's indulge. I want to take a few moments to relax. My head is spinning from listening to Eb.
The cost of getting that cake from Eb is listening to him talk about nuclear energy. Pop tell Mom all he’s learned:
Pop: At today's usage rates for energy, we have proven reserves of oil for 42 years, natural gas for 57 years, uranium for 85 years, and coal for 137 years, though exploration turns up new supplies all the time.
Mom’s conclusion?
With 53 new plants under construction worldwide, mostly in Asia, it's time for the U.S. government to come up with an energy policy that has nuclear as its base, or we are going to be left behind the rest of the world - especially emerging Asia. A new plant has not been built in the U.S. in 30 years!
We wish Russo had stuck to his conceit – a lot more about that delicious cake would not have gone wrong – and the article feels like a data dump of all Russo has learned than a dialogue. Real people tend to think more in terms of metaphor, which this approach would allow and would give it more point. Still, credit to Russo for looking for an interesting angle; Russo himself is clearly working his way through a lot of complex material and that can only be appreciated.
---
Some not very surprising news:
A group of U.S. businesses is postponing a trip to the United Arab Emirates to discuss lucrative nuclear-reactor contracts with a company backed by an influential emirate in the federation.
The president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's U.S.-U.A.E Business Council said Monday the planned trade mission will probably take place in late January or early February instead of December. The U.A.E. has delayed picking a primary contractor for the project, but "it's not a financial issue--they're just being extremely meticulous and careful in their review of the final bids," said Danny Sebright, the president of the U.S.-U.A.E. Business Council.
We wouldn’t like to be Sebright at this particular moment in time – because he has to tread between several (at best) ambiguous situations. We’ll check back in later and see whether the Chamber’s trip happens early next year. (Right now, the UAE looks to be eyeing a plant design from South Korea, which may weigh in on American plans.)
---
Here’s a very nice video from Entergy touting the uprate to its Grand Gulf (Mississippi) station. Our unidentified host takes a folksy approach to explaining how the plant benefits customers, the environment and the local economy. Speaking to customers sometimes equates to speaking down to them, but Entergy does not step wrong here. Very nicely done. (And be sure to visit the NEI Network at YouTube. We collect all the nuclear-related videos we can find there.)


Comments

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