Skip to main content

A Thought, Security, Bad Logos?

Where non-proliferation and nuclear energy meet, from China’s Xinhua news service:

Nuclear energy is one of the most important energies for humans in the future. The world community can safely control the "double-edged sword" and contribute to the world's enduring peace and common prosperity as long as countries work closely based on the principles of protecting mankind's common interests and mutual benefits.

Doesn’t get much simpler than that.

---

After President Obama’s Nuclear Security Summit, NEI hosted a companion meeting with global leaders from the nuclear industry to take the first steps in an action plan that industry will develop with government.

[nEI President and CEO Marvin] Fertel emphasized that the industry would work with governments to ensure security of nuclear materials.

“This meeting is part of an ongoing engagement by U.S. industry—with our colleagues from around the world—to provide input to government policy, share lessons learned in this area, and ensure that we continue to operate our commercial facilities in a manner that prioritizes nuclear safety and security above all other matters,” he said.

Much more here, with some video of the press conference following the conference.

---

We were amused by the New York Post column by Michael Goodwin that notes the similarity between the Nuclear Security Summit’s logo and the crescent symbol of Islam.

No, I am not suggesting President Obama is a secret Muslim. But I am certain the crescent-like design of the logo is not a coincidence, especially at an event where Iran's nuclear ambition and al Qaeda's search for a bomb are prime topics.

Well, the only way to be certain about something is to know it is the truth, and Goodwin doesn’t, so that’s hooey. (And the rest of the article is just as illuminating.) But in investigating further we made our own startling discovery.

Here’s the Nuclear Summit logo (with the President is Chinese President Hu Jintao):

nuclear security summit

and here’s the NEI logo:

home_branding_logo

NEI’s is pretty crescent-like, and that ball coming at you, does it suggest something sinister? It’s possible that both logos, in their different ways, represent an electron speeding around a nucleus – that might be logical given the subject matter and all – but how can we know that? In the absence of common sense, shouldn’t we always jump to the conclusion that most supports our prejudices?

Comments

Greg Molyneux said…
When dealing with abstraction you can almost always find what you are looking for if you look hard enough. In this case I that thinking certainly applies. That said, I find the Nuclear Security Summit logo to be far less sinister; I view it symbolically as how nuclear energy is about to come full circle. Of course, I am most likely seeing that because that is precisely what I want to believe.
Finrod said…
The NEI logo has some vague similarity to the Blake's 7 logo. I therefore conclude that NEI is secretly dedicated to the eventual establishment of a militaristic interstellar totalitarian state whose elite civilian and military administrators are all poms.
DailyShowFan said…
As always Jon Steward has the best comment on the issue, see the video at the bottom here: http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0415/stewart-fox-news-logo-nazi-propaganda/

Another comment of his concerning nonsense around the nuclear arms reduction treaty reporting: http://vodpod.com/watch/3395378-the-big-bang-treaty
Steve said…
Mark, you watch too much Fox News.

Popular posts from this blog

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

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...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

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...

How Much Land Does Nuclear, Wind and Solar Really Need?

Not too long ago, we reviewed a report that looked at nuclear energy (and other energy sources) as biodiversity agents. This had to do, in part, with the amount of land a facility needs to function. Nuclear energy and fossil fuel plants use relatively little, wind farms and solar arrays quite a lot of land . Based on an objective and transparent analysis of our sustainable energy choices, we have come to the evidence-based conclusion that nuclear energy is a good option for biodiversity conservation (and society in general) and that other alternatives to fossil fuels should be subjected to the same cost–benefit analyses (in terms of biodiversity and climate outcomes, as well as sociopolitical imperatives) before accepting or dismissing them. Writer Barry Brook, who collected 75 scientists to endorse his paper, is interested in land use as it impacts flora and fauna. Biodiversity concerns do not get as much play as they might – and, when they do, it annoys many when land is withdraw...