NEI Nuclear Notes

The following is a guest post from NEI Senior Vice President of Communications  Scott Peterson, reporting from the  59th General Conference of the IAEA  .  Scott Peterson With the 21st session of Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) just 10 weeks away, one hopes that this week’s United Nations conference in Vienna is setting the stage for negotiations around meeting the 2-degree reduction by 2050. Leaders at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), meeting today in the opening session of its general conference, echoed a resounding statement of support for nuclear energy to increase its share of electricity production globally as one way to meet the carbon reduction challenge. Nearly 440 reactors in 30 countries generate 11 percent of the world’s electricity. “Nuclear power is one of the lowest emitters of carbon dioxide among energy sources when emissions through entire life cycles ...

Not specifically about nuclear energy – or is it? The White House on Tuesday introduced President Obama’s blueprint for cutting greenhouse gas emissions in the United States by nearly a third over the next decade. Mr. Obama’s plan, part of a formal written submission to the United Nations ahead of efforts to forge a global climate change accord in Paris in December, detailed the United States’ part of an ambitious joint pledge made by Mr. Obama and President Xi Jinping of China in November. And how to cut greenhouse gases? Mr. Obama’s new blueprint brings together several domestic initiatives that were already in the works, including freezing construction of new coal-fired power plants, increasing the fuel economy of vehicles and plugging methane leaks from oil and gas production. It is meant to describe how the United States will lead by example and meet its pledge for cutting emissions. These are all fine, but this is the bit where nuclear energy enters the pictu...

The United Nations Climate Summit September 24 has an interesting format. It brings together 120 heads of state (or their representatives)to “announce bold actions that they will be taking in their countries.” These, I assume, could be anything on-topic, so there may be some nuclear energy-related announcements. Everything could be kind of vague and feel-good – gestures toward energy efficiency, for example – or countries get very ambitious with their announcements. This is a U.N. effort, but should not be confused  with the Framework Convention on Climate Change. I suppose it’s okay to call the summit a bit more casual – or at least as casual as such a high-level meeting could be. Write Jerry Kremer over at the Huffington Post connects the summit with its location, focusing on New York state’s own emissions profile. While New Yorkers produce 8 metric tons of carbon dioxide per capita annually, the national average is more than 150 percent higher -- and in some states 300...

Some words from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at the United Nations: The Obama Administration is committed to nuclear power as a component of our secure energy future, and we recognize that nuclear power is a vital contributor to the world’s growing energy needs. It is, therefore, not an option that we simply can take off the table. But: But it is an option that carries special risks and dangers. Therefore, we must do everything possible to ensure its safe and responsible use. We must remain vigilant against outside threats and internal weaknesses to prevent accidents from occurring. We must make continuous improvements to regulations and strengthen implementation of existing conventions so we hold ourselves, and others, to the highest standards. One might call all this self-evident, but she was speaking at a high-level meeting on nuclear safety of the United Nations General Assembly yesterday, so perhaps we can allow for the self-evident. Here is Japanese Prim...

There’s a certain logic here: Kiriyenko said the impact from the Fukushima plant disaster would not only increase safety concerns but also quicken demand for new reactors to replace the industry's ageing plants. "There will be a need to build new plants more quickly to more swiftly replace previous-generation plants," he said. He added that Russia may speed the retirement of its older generation plants in the wake of Japan's nuclear accident. I can’t decide if what Kiriyenko is asking here is, essentially, why let Fukushima go to waste? If the accident there allows new plants to be built in Russia whether or not they are needed, that seems rather too cynical. Because the corollary would be to say that the older plants need replacing and that would be irresponsible. Maybe Kiriyenko is just musing out loud. He does say this: Russia has said it has no intention of curbing its drive for more nuclear power at home and for export. Russia here pre...

Yesterday, we noted that Libyan President Muammar el-Qaddafi followed President Obama’s speech at the United Nations with a speech that ran about an hour over its quota. We didn’t mention that it drifted in from Cloud Cuckooland with a pit stop in Madville. It did prove the perfect introduction to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who went into full-on rant mode about Israel and capitalism. It wasn’t a heart warming performance and a lot of the delegates – Western ones, in particular – walked out. But after the speech, Iran went as far as it has done so far to open the door to negotiating over its nuclear ambitions. Iran is willing to have its nuclear experts meet with scientists from the United States and other world powers as a confidence-building measure aimed at resolving concerns about Tehran's nuclear program, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Wednesday. This might be occurring because some of the bigger countries are talking about more severe sanct...

As you may have heard, President Barack Obama gave a speech at the United Nations about climate change yesterday. Now, just to get it out of the way, he had nothing or next to nothing to say about nuclear energy. If nuclear is there, it is there implicitly only. --- We can assume Obama would like to have come with more to offer – above all, an energy bill that addresses climate change. If the tea leaf readings about cryptic statements from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (R-Nev.) are correct, there will be no bill this year. Much of the speech echoed the health care speech Obama gave last week in that it focused on the need for action. But I'm here today to say that difficulty is no excuse for complacency.  Unease is no excuse for inaction.  And we must not allow the perfect to become the enemy of progress.  That does sound more directed to Congress than the U.N., but Obama talked to the international community as well. But those rapidly growing de...