Skip to main content

Ernest Moniz Tapped for Energy Secretary


If you want a sense of what Ernest Moniz, the MIT physicist who is President Barack Obama’s pick for energy secretary, thinks about nuclear energy, read some of his writing. There’s a lot of it, and he’s pretty direct:
It would be a mistake, however, to let Fukushima cause governments to abandon nuclear power and its benefits. Electricity generation emits more carbon dioxide in the United States than does transportation or industry, and nuclear power is the largest source of carbon-free electricity in the country. Nuclear power generation is also relatively cheap, costing less than two cents per kilowatt-hour for operations, maintenance, and fuel. Even after the Fukushima disaster, China, which accounts for about 40 percent of current nuclear power plant construction, and India, Russia, and South Korea, which together account for another 40 percent, shows no signs of backing away from their pushes for nuclear power.
This is from November 2, 2011. A little more:
Nuclear power's track record of providing clean and reliable electricity compares favorably with other energy sources. Low natural gas prices, mostly the result of newly accessible shale gas, have brightened the prospects that efficient gas-burning power plants could cut emissions of carbon dioxide and other pollutants relatively quickly by displacing old, inefficient coal plants, but the historical volatility of natural gas prices has made utility companies wary of putting all their eggs in that basket. Besides, in the long run, burning natural gas would still release too much carbon dioxide.
Moniz is Director of the Energy Initiative and Professor of Physics and Engineering Systems at MIT. He served as Undersecretary at the Department of Energy in 1997–2001.

NEI’s take is here, from President and CEO Marvin Fertel:
“In nominating Ernie Moniz to be Secretary of Energy, President Obama has sent America a strong message that its energy leadership will be entrusted to an advocate of clean energy supplies, including nuclear energy. Dr. Moniz is experienced and well respected in the energy, nonproliferation and national security communities worldwide.  He has made it clear that he recognizes nuclear energy’s important role in reducing greenhouse gases as part of a balanced, low-carbon electricity generation portfolio.
Like NRC Chairman Allison Macfarlane, Moniz was a member of the administration’s Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future, which recommended a new strategy for managing used nuclear fuel.

I’m sure we’ll learn plenty more in the coming days.

Comments

jimwg said…
Holding my breath till he walks the talk -- and in a green-committed administration that'd rather throw billions at solar and wind and algae than one SMR, or call the anti-nuke dogs off nuke projects, that might be a very long time.

James Greenidge
Queens NY


Anonymous said…
So far the only beef I have with Moniz was the role he played in getting the High Flux Beam Reactor at Brookhaven shutdown. That was back in the dark days of the Clinton era and the Richardson DOE. Granted that BNL and its operator at the time didn't handle the situation very well from a PR viewpoint, but in the end there was no technical or safety justification for trashing a scientific facility that was incredibly productive and perfectly benign. Moniz was at DOE at the time and had a hand in this fiasco, which in the end dirtied the hands of everyone involved. It not only ruined a very useful scientific tool, but destroyed the careers and jobs of very many fine people. For that, I cannot overlook the culpability of all those involved, and that includes mainly Bill Richardson but also, unfortunately, Ernie Moniz.

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...

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

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...

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...