Skip to main content

NEI's Paul Genoa Hits 10 Markets in Radio Media Tour on Small Modular Reactors

By Eric McErlain
This morning Paul Genoa, NEI’s senior director of policy development, completed a tour of 10 radio outlets – including three state networks covering Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee – discussing small reactor technology in the context of the administration’s release of the FY 14 budget tomorrow. The president has supported SMR technology in his budgets each of the past three years. Paul characterized SMRs as an “elegant evolution” relative to large light water reactor technology, one whose development over the next decade will “kickstart an entire industry.”

You'd be right in believing that today in industry there is a good deal of excitement about the frontier of SMR technology, and for good reason.
B&W's mPower SMR.
The four current SMR designs, Paul told his radio audiences, possess “an economy of scaleability,” affording them the versatility to respond to load growth, and are likely to be situated on sites of about 30 acres, or “the size of a relatively small shopping center.” They are being designed in a post 9/11, post-Fukushima environment, with safety advances incorporated from the ground up.

On the radio today Paul was particularly effective I thought in conveying safety messaging. His segments in Virginia (Richmond, Roanoke) aroused discussion of nuclear technology relative to the August 2011 earthquake there, and Paul noted that while that earthquake delivered some significant damage to the Washington Monument, our National Cathedral, and even Union Station, “at the North Anna nuclear plant the earthquake didn’t even damage a lightbulb” on site.

More effective messaging: While America today has seen an erosion of some aspects of its manufacturing leadership, Paul pointed out, it remains a world leader in aerospace, technology, and defense, and the skills and expertise in these realms are directly relatable and transferable to SMR development.

Paul’s radio tour took him to the aforementioned Midwest states as well as the municipalities of Raleigh-Durham, Richmond, Roanoke, Washington, DC, and St. Louis. Paul appeared on two separate stations in St. Louis this morning, and one host there told him on the air that he’d be happy to have an SMR in his backyard!

Paul very effectively evoked third part support for SMR technology, from Energy Secretary Steven Chu to the President’s top climate advisor, James Hansen, to Bill Gates, who is putting his own money into new reactor deisgns. Gates is driven by a vision to address our planet’s more than 2 billion inhabitants who today have no access to clean drinking water or electricity. “The world would be a better place with Gates’ SMR vision deployed,” Paul said over the airwaves. “We can influence the safety and security of the planet with this technology,” added.

Here's a clip of Genoa from this morning appearing on WJMA-FM in Central Virginia.



Labels:

Comments

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