Skip to main content

Four Updates to Our Nuclear Blogroll

By

Thanks to Dan and Rod, we have four new blogs added to our blogroll.

First is Yes Vermont Yankee whose writer, Meredith Angwin, has put herself through the angst and some joys of going to anti-nuclear shindigs. Her latest experience at an anti-nuclear potluck was a bit inspiring in the fact that the two sides were able to get along quite well.

Next is Nuke Power Talk which is written by Gail Marcus and what caught mine and Dan’s eyes about her writing was her piece, New Year Reflections. In it, she offers six resolutions for the nuclear industry (highlighted below) along with compelling explanations at her piece:

1. We should not count our chickens before they hatch.

2. We should not rest on our laurels.

3. We should not make promises we can't keep.

4. We should provide the public with simple, but reasoned--and accurate--arguments.

5. We should not fight ourselves.

6. We should face our own faults, and do something about them.

Third is Patrick McEwen, a nuclear engineering student at University of Wisconsin. Patrick writes at Nuclear Dialogues and his latest post offered some thoughtful perspectives on how the pro-nuclear side can address what a long-term solution means for used nuclear fuel (though he prefers we should only call it nuclear waste). He also has a sweet header for the title of his blog.

And last but not least we have Fuel Cycle Week who, according to Dan, will get back into blogging soon. We’re eager to keep up with their posts.

Four new pro-nuclear blogs have been added at the beginning of the year. If these additions are any indication, 2010 may be looking like a promising year for the nuclear industry. I’d be curious if anyone knows of any new anti-nuclear blogs out there, I’ve seen none…

Happy late welcome to you four!

Labels:

Comments

Anonymous said…
He was being snarky, not serious, when he said to call spent fuel "waste."
January 8, 2010 at 2:50 PM
Meredith Angwin said…
Alas. There is a new anti-blog, by a man who calls himself Fake Rob Williams. It makes fun of the I AM VY site featuring Vermont Yankee employees.

Aw heck, here's a link.

http://ilovevermontyankee.blogspot.com/
January 8, 2010 at 3:08 PM
David Bradish said…
He was being snarky, not serious, when he said to call spent fuel "waste."

Can't believe I missed that, thx.
January 8, 2010 at 3:27 PM
Anonymous said…
No way, nuclear power plants are the last thing that California needs... We don't need nuclear disasters built on fault lines or potential Suomi hit coast lines like Japan, and nuclear might be clean at the start but we still cant get rid of the wast we have... Solar, Wind and Ocean Power is the only way to go for the future of California's power needs... We need less Nuclear not More !!!!
October 1, 2012 at 7:18 PM
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