Skip to main content

Rudy Giuliani on Nuclear Energy

It’s a great pleasure and surprise when someone who has not said much about nuclear energy one way or another comes out strongly in favor. So here’s New York City’s former Mayor Rudy Giuliani in the Daily News:

We were recently reminded why maintaining a diverse fuel supply is so critical. The extreme cold weather that hit the city this winter caused New York City’s electricity prices to surge to record highs; customers saw their bills spike more than 20%. Many attributed the boost to rising prices for natural gas, which powers most of our electricity generators.

To protect against even more volatile price increases, we need to protect and preserve safe and stable-priced sources of power — such as the nuclear plants at Indian Point.

Electric reliability and the possibility of power outages were constant concerns of mine during my years as mayor, during the brutal winters as well as grueling, hot summer months. Our electric infrastructure is a vital part of New York — it powers our mass transit, our world-class health care, our communications, our financial markets and all the other the private-sector businesses and public organizations that drive our economy.

Given the unexpected challenges our region has faced over the past few years — from Hurricane Irene and superstorm Sandy — the mission to preserve and improve our power systems has never been more critical. We should use available federal funds to strengthen our existing electric system, and thereby offset the needed investment costs.

Most importantly, this will enable us to keep power costs under control — which is important for our region’s economic attractiveness.

A lot more at the link. He has his facts in order and, with a focus on the New York area, he has knows his beans about energy options. Very impressive op-ed from a very impressive figure.

Comments

jimwg said…
Actually Rudy's been advocating Indian Point (and Shoreham) for quite a long while, even long before 911. One of the few pols out there with the spine to come out to hawk nuclear, though regrettably is pretty much a lone wolf about it here as he's advocating in a "progressive" bastion and against a formidable the Cuomo dynasty which is hell bent on shuttering IP with very unscrupulously rabid green groups here. We really have to get a handle on challenging FUD groups and spokespeople!

James Greenidge
Queens NY

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 …

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.

Huh?

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…

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…