Skip to main content

Browner, Korea and the Chamber

Carol Browner arms folded Carol Browner, President Obama’s energy and climate advisor, said some nice things about nuclear energy:

"We have not built a nuclear plant in this country in a long time but we want to work with the industry to make that happen in the not too distant future," Browner said in a live chat on the White House website.

"We have been working with the nuclear industry to understand exactly what it is they need."

This adds Browner to the list of relevant administration figures to endorse nuclear energy (Chu, EPA administrator Lisa Jackson, Obama himself), so we’ll take it.

---

We were interested to see South Korea make a plant sale to UAE – the country had not seemed a major competitor before then – but the sale has unleashed ambition.

South Korea is aiming to grab at least 20 percent of the global market for nuclear reactors in the next 20 years, the government announced Wednesday.

A lot of ambition.

[Kim Young-hak, vice minister for Knowledge Economy] said by 2030, South Korea should join the United States and France as one of the world's leading builders of nuclear reactors.

The country aims to export 80 nuclear reactors by 2030, he said.

What can we say? Welcome, South Korea.

---

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce always has the option of staying neutral on a topic when its membership lacks consensus, but has lately taken on some hot topics, notably health care reform. However, we think the chamber has picked just about the right moment for this one, in a story about its 2010 plan:

On energy, [Chamber President and CEO Thomas] Donohue said nuclear power needs to be part of the nation's energy-producing mix. He said he has spoken to many in the environmental movement and senses a thaw in their longtime opposition to nuclear plants, which produce much lower emissions than coal-fired power plants.

We think Donohue has this about right in every aspect, and the Chamber in general has always seen nuclear energy in, shall we say, an enlightened way. So no complaint – maybe any of the chamber’s members who have issues with nuclear energy, will explore the topic more thoroughly.

Correx: We’re sure South Korea would love to sell a plant to India, but the sale was actually to UAE. Corrected. Thanks to reader E. Michael Blake for the catch.

Carol Browner wants you to know.

Comments

Georg said…
Im trying to find a contact on your blog but I cant. this is totally of topic but my only way to make contact.

In the autumn I have been working together on a project with KSU (nuclear safety and education) which aims to make YouTube videos of their brochures, first out is "ionizing radiation". Swedes target audience is between 13 to 35. The goal with movies is to spread knowledge about the subject in a simple, flexible format that is easy to absorb.

We are so happy with the result that we now want to get them to the public, in my search for pages that would fit, I turned on your. I thought it might fit.

anyway. This is the result http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=DE82FF9404E57FF3 Swedish version

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=2F32241381ECC3E7 English version

Best wishes, George
If you wish to contact me georg(at)kollektivetlivet.se
Anonymous said…
As much as I would like to believe Ms. Browner, and Mr. Obama, and Ms. Jackson (I do believe Dr. Chu), I'm going to maintain my comfortable paranoid mistrust until a new reactor actually goes critical and contacts the grid. It would be easy for Obama et al. to talk big about nuclear power while ordering proxies on Capitol Hill to kill it.
Anonymous said…
I'm posting anonymously, but I identify myself below. First, where you refer to a contract between South Korea and India, I think you mean that it's between South Korea and the United Arab Emirates.

Second, the unidentified anonymous poster might not be satisfied under the best of circumstances, because none of the proposed new reactors are expected to start up until 2016 or later, and even with two terms Obama would leave office in January 2017.

--E. Michael Blake
SteveK9 said…
The chamber would sound more convincing if they weren't in the camp of climate-change deniers. That has caused them some grief with a range of large industrial companies, who withdrew from the chamber over the issue.

It's nice to argue for nuclear power from a logical perspective, but you need to be consistent.
DocForesight said…
"in the not too distant future" -

This reminds me of my attitude towards commitment with females gaining my attention and affection 20-30 years ago. I would approach my trust in the sentiment now expressed by this administration with the same "prove it" approach that I received from the objects of my interest then.

Considering the rhetorical emphasis placed on wind, solar, geothermal and "renewables" that dominates this administration, I would keep my powder dry. Sorry for the mixed metaphors but didn't want to follow the train of thought in paragraph 1.

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...