Skip to main content

Public Poll: Nuclear Advocates Needed

By

There is an unofficial poll being conducted by The Los Angeles Times regarding the future of San Onofre Nuclear Generation Station. If you support the continued operation of San Onofre nuclear plant, please click here, scroll down to the bottom of the page, and vote to: "Reopen them and seek a new license to keep them running until 2042."

Here’s a look at the poll:

image

Though the poll is unofficial, these polls can still influence readers, so your participation is greatly appreciated.
 
Please note that polls can be taken down at the newspaper's discretion so please vote today, and feel free to share this link with family and friends that support San Onofre.

Thank you for taking the time to show your support for nuclear power.

Comments

jimwg said…
I know it's wearisome to hear, but had the nuclear industry maintained a steady public nuclear education program and PSAs through the decades, it could've helped promote acceptance of nuclear plants even though TMI's P.R. disaster, and now with the media and anti-nukers smelling blood in the water vis-a-via Fukushima (whose P.R. effect could've been mitigated by more active air support here despite Jackzo), they're going to smear as much fact and truth as possible to finally hammer the nails in. You'd think the the nuclear "industry"/unions would've learned a lesson by now, yet the airwaves are crammed with Oil and Gas commercials with only crickets cheerleading the nuclear side; nuclear power conferences still avoid the issue of dealing with and de-FUD'ing anti-nuclear activists who are harvesting greater numbers and voters every day with the assistance of the media; and most of the pro-nuclear public education heavy-lifting is done by unassisted grass-roots advocacy groups valiantly surging against the tsunami of FUD and hysteria. So, yea, we should not be surprised by the result of this poll. The nuclear industry needs to take a lesson from the computing world regards to public acceptance and education: garbage-in garbage-out.

James Greenidge
Queens NY
June 19, 2012 at 5:03 PM
Andrew Jaremko said…
I went to the poll on Wednesday the 20th at 5:40 pm Pacific time and found it still available. The vote is running nicely in favor of keeping the plant open past 2022. Keep voting!
June 20, 2012 at 8:44 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