Skip to main content

A Roundtable, A Voice and Death

Bob Guccioni Interesting roundtable discussion over at Penn Central. Participants include John Herron, president, CEO and chief nuclear officer of Entergy Nuclear; Mark Marano, Areva senior vice president of U.S. new build operations; Danny Roderick, GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy's senior vice president for new plant projects; Christofer Mowry, president and CEO, B&W Modular Nuclear Energy, LLC; and Deva Chari, Westinghouse senior vice president of Nuclear Power Plants.

Lots of different topics are discussed: here’s a sampling of the questions:

There has been a lot of talk about the possibility of a nuclear renaissance globally. What is the outlook for new nuclear projects over the next couple of years, especially given the global recession?

How are the dynamics for new nuclear in North America different than they were a couple of years ago?

The Department of Energy approved a federal loan guarantee last February for Southern’s proposed units, but nothing has happened since then. Constellation Energy and NRG Energy have both said they will cut back on the amount they are spending to develop proposed units while they wait for federal action. How large of a problem is the delay in federal loan guarantees?

New reports made a big deal over the summer regarding a report North Carolina suggesting that solar is now less expensive to build than nuclear. In the face of that kind of press, what’s the economic argument in favor of new nuclear?

(I found this report very dubious; it’s no surprise these gentlemen do, too. Here’s Roderick: “Well first of all I did read that report and it is very one-sided. It does not compare apples to apples whatsoever.” – a point on which Mowry expands: “Solar is roughly 24 cents a kWh. It is at best three times as expensive as the power that comes out of nuclear and I think you really have to look at the marginal cost because of the kind of power that it is, [in] which case [it] may be five to 10 times more expensive. So that is absolutely not the case.”)

Are you hearing concerns from Wall Street regarding the three years or so of exposure that the capital will face during new plant construction?

As you can see, some of the most contentious issues out there are given a airing. Well worth reading the whole thing.


Growing demands for energy around the world have nations increasingly looking to the promise of nuclear power to fuel their growth and development needs.

Nothing to disagree with there, but the notable fact about this little article is that it is published at the Voice of America, the U.S. radio service (TV, too, though not as much) for other countries. So there is a bit of interest in what the American attitude is in the material being transmitted.

With nuclear power's potential however, comes responsibilities. One is that nations developing nuclear energy for civilian uses commit to preventing nuclear technology from being diverted to other nations or groups that might use it to develop weapons of mass destruction.

Other than the term “weapons of mass destruction” losing some of its luster, it’s a fair metric of concern, especially since it is used to promote the idea of a fuel bank, an international entity that will track uranium used at plants and retrieve the used nuclear fuel.

We look forward to working with both nuclear power-capable and developing nations to establish an IAEA Fuel Bank that can help to harness peaceful nuclear power for the benefit of all.

So, as one might expect, an accurate and pointed statement of U.S. interest.


I’m not a big reader of obituaries – time for that later – but I do read the New York Times and Washington Post obits of prominent people. Often, these include tidbits of information I did not know or might prefer not to know.

He once hired 82 scientists to develop a small nuclear reactor as a low-cost energy source, but it came to nothing and cost $17 million.

This is from the NYT obit of Bob Guccione, the publisher of Penthouse (and Omni, a pretty good science magazine.), who died last week at the age of 79.

In looking around for more details, I found that Rod Adams at the invaluable Atomic Insights blog had already dug into this topic. Hint: it involves fusion, for all you fans of the sun. Rod will tell you the rest.

Bob Guccioni. That’s one of his own paintings. This page has a gallery showing details of some of his work. It looks like Guccioni became fascinated with early Picasso and pinned his style there.


Popular posts from this blog

A Billion Miles Under Nuclear Energy (Updated)

And the winner is…Cassini-Huygens, in triple overtime.

The spaceship conceived in 1982 and launched fifteen years later, will crash into Saturn on September 15, after a mission of 19 years and 355 days, powered by the audacity and technical prowess of scientists and engineers from 17 different countries, and 72 pounds of plutonium.

The mission was so successful that it was extended three times; it was intended to last only until 2008.

Since April, the ship has been continuing to orbit Saturn, swinging through the 1,500-mile gap between the planet and its rings, an area not previously explored. This is a good maneuver for a spaceship nearing the end of its mission, since colliding with a rock could end things early.

Cassini will dive a little deeper and plunge toward Saturn’s surface, where it will transmit data until it burns up in the planet’s atmosphere. The radio signal will arrive here early Friday morning, Eastern time. A NASA video explains.

In the years since Cassini has launc…

Sneak Peek

There's an invisible force powering and propelling our way of life.
It's all around us. You can't feel it. Smell it. Or taste it.
But it's there all the same. And if you look close enough, you can see all the amazing and wondrous things it does.
It not only powers our cities and towns.
And all the high-tech things we love.
It gives us the power to invent.
To explore.
To discover.
To create advanced technologies.
This invisible force creates jobs out of thin air.
It adds billions to our economy.
It's on even when we're not.
And stays on no matter what Mother Nature throws at it.
This invisible force takes us to the outer reaches of outer space.
And to the very depths of our oceans.
It brings us together. And it makes us better.
And most importantly, it has the power to do all this in our lifetime while barely leaving a trace.
Some people might say it's kind of unbelievable.
They wonder, what is this new power that does all these extraordinary things?

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.


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…