Skip to main content

Georgia Nuclear Peachy

Energieeule4_button_bigger Southern Co. is busily working on the site for their two new reactors at its Plant Vogtle site in Georgia, so the Associated Press decided to ask the state’s Republican gubernatorial candidates what they think about nuclear energy in the state.

Answer: they’re for it.

Here’s former Congressman Nathan Deal:

"I believe it is an answer to part of our energy issues," Deal said in a recent interview. "It is a renewable resource."

Well, sustainable, anyway, but we’ll take it.

And here’s former Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel:

"I support a diversification of our sources for electrical generation and believe that nuclear power represents a safe and clean option and should continue to play significant role in Georgia's overall power generation supply," she said in a statement.

Here’s Handel’s Web site – she won an endorsement from former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, which is right up front. On the issues page, she doesn’t have an energy section, though I may not have spotted it under a different heading.

And here’s Nathan Deal’s Web site – he won an endorsement from former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. Also nothing on energy we could find.

The Democrat is former Gov. Roy Barnes. We looked around to see if he had said anything about nuclear energy, but nothing turned up. But we were interested to run into this campaign ad. Here’s the script:

Narrator: Because of our great climate and growth rate, Georgia is the Saudi Arabia of pine trees. Europeans burn fuel pellets made from Georgia pine. But we don’t require our own electric plants to use them. If they just burned 10 percent pine pellets, thousands of jobs would be produced.

Barnes: When I’m governor, we’ll turn our renewable forests into a job-creating industry.

Pine fuel pellets? Well, that’s – specific. But you can see where the focus is here – jobs and more jobs. Really, that’s the focus for all three candidates.

The Republic primary is August 10. In the most recent polling I could find, Deal and Handel are running neck-and-neck. The same Rasmussen poll shows either Republican running neck-and-neck with Barnes. Sounds like an exciting race.

---

Since, as we learned yesterday, Germany wants to switch over to all renewable energy by 2050 – despite being in a rather difficult place to accomplish that by then – all one can say is, if that’s what the Germans want to do, good luck to them.

But maybe it will take more than luck. Maybe it will take – a logo.

Environmental group Greenpeace in partnership with creative talent contest website Jovoto have launched a global campaign to design a visual message to support the slogan "Renewable energy can cover 100% of our power requirements by 2050."

Greenpeace has a motivation for doing this – it doesn’t seem to believe it’s very likely, either.

In September 2010, Germany's federal government intends to submit a national energy concept which will outline Germany's policy on power generation for the coming decades; however there is concern amongst environmental groups that Germany will choose to focus more efforts on nuclear power as well as renewable energy - several scientists have also expressed doubts that the two sources can coexist equally.

I cannot quite parse what the last part of that paragraph means – nuclear and renewable energy cannot co-exist? That would be incorrect, but that may not be what is meant.

But as far as the logo is concerned:

The campaign, which runs until August 15, is open to internet users around the world and hopes to draw attention to the benefits of renewables and encourage people in Germany to express their opposition to nuclear power.

So far, not too much of the latter – there’s one clever little video in which the nuclear symbol turns into the blades of a windmill - and some of the former. If you want to participate, head on over here. A few logos showing renewables and nuclear happy together would not go amiss.

One of the logo entries. Weitblick means vision – hence the wise owl with glasses, I guess – and Erneuer means renewable – not quite sure about the bare suffix there. If you decide to participate, nuclear energy is Kernenergie.

Comments

Bill said…
"Erneuer means renewable – not quite sure about the bare suffix there."

Erneur means "(to) renew", -bar means "-able"; the -e is the feminine suffix, to match Energie.
Brian Mays said…
"Germany's federal government intends to submit a national energy concept which will outline Germany's policy on power generation for the coming decades."

Here's my concept for a logo that represents Germany's policy on power generation. Sure, this image has been done before, but at least it's Green. ;-)

Apparently, Germany's policy is to loot its highly successful nuclear power plants so that it can waste money on decadent, pathetically useless "renewable" scams. If this policy catches on, then perhaps Germany will invade France again. There are plenty of nuclear power plants to loot west of the border, and you have to admit, that has been a popular German strategy over the past century.
Robin said…
My version of the logo. Please support...
http://www.jovoto.com/contests/creativity-for-the-energy-revolution/ideas/6313

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…