Skip to main content

Looking for the Union Label

300px-IBEW_Logo The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) represents a great many workers at nuclear energy plants, but has been notably silent on the events in Japan and what it means for American nuclear plants. Until now, that is:

The IBEW believes that our nation’s nuclear energy industry is well-prepared to deal with any events as potentially harmful as earthquakes and tsunamis. We represent more than 15,000 workers at 42 plants across North America in one of the most well-regulated, tightly-run industries in the world. Nuclear operators and workers are professional and highly-trained, and their facilities have a record of standing up to challenges:

  • Reactors are designed to withstand maximum projected earthquakes and tsunamis.
  • Louisiana’s Waterford station maintained safe operation following Hurricane Katrina.
  • Illinois’ IBEW-run Quad Cities station withstood tornados twice in the 1990s.
  • Following 9/11, plant designs and practices were upgraded to resist aircraft impact.
  • All U.S. nuclear plants undergo multiple safety drills overseen by federal agencies.

And it doesn’t forget what this is about:

We admire the plant workers in Japan who are demonstrating courage under enormously difficult conditions to repair their facilities. At the same time, we feel it is necessary to draw a distinction between Japan’s industry and our own, while reminding the public that one unique incident – however dire – does not provide adequate context from which to base sound decisions regarding the future of our clean power generation.

A very good point and one that does seem to be penetrating the minds and opinions of policymakers and commentators.

We’ll have a story about the IBEW and other unions at NEI’s Insight newsletter site soon. I’ll provide a link when it is live.

---

Justin Pemberton’s film The Nuclear Comeback aims to be a fair, even-handed look at the nuclear energy industry, notably the embrace of it by those who see it as a means to produced a lot of emission-free electricity – which, of course, it is.

In a world living in fear of climate change and global warming, the nuclear industry is now proposing itself as a solution. It claims that nuclear power generation produces zero carbon emissions... and people are listening. [Maybe because it’s true.] The result is the beginning of a global nuclear renaissance, with 27 nuclear power stations under construction, and another 136 to be commenced within the next decade.

I can say the film is better than the write-up for it. Try this:

Despite nuclear power's new environmental benefits, detractors claim that it's producing a 100,000-year legacy of radioactive waste, for which there is not yet any permanent storage, that the power stations are known terrorist targets, and that the industry, in addition to its links to nuclear weapons, has a reputation for accidents and cover-ups.

Plus, they serve stewed kittens in the plant cafeterias.

But don’t let all this put you off – it’s an interesting work that tries to give all sides a voice. You can watch the whole thing for free here.

Comments

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 …

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…

Nuclear Is a Long-Term Investment for Ohio that Will Pay Big

With 50 different state legislative calendars, more than half of them adjourn by June, and those still in session throughout the year usually take a recess in the summer. So springtime is prime time for state legislative activity. In the next few weeks, legislatures are hosting hearings and calling for votes on bills that have been battered back and forth in the capital halls.

On Tuesday, The Ohio Public Utilities Committee hosted its third round of hearings on the Zero Emissions Nuclear Resources Program, House Bill 178, and NEI’s Maria Korsnick testified before a jam-packed room of legislators.


Washingtonians parachuting into state debates can be a tricky platform, but in this case, Maria’s remarks provided national perspective that put the Ohio conundrum into context. At the heart of this debate is the impact nuclear plants have on local jobs and the local economy, and that nuclear assets should be viewed as “long-term investments” for the state. Of course, clean air and electrons …