Skip to main content

CNA Stands Firm on Public Service Advertising

From the CBC:
An organization that represents the Canadian nuclear industry says it has no plans to pull ads that promote nuclear energy despite a formal complaint by a handful of environmental groups.

Murray Elston, president of the Canadian Nuclear Association, said the nuclear industry is safe and he is confident that the Competition Bureau will not find any problems with its ads.

"I'm not changing the ads. The industry is very safe. It is very clean," he said Tuesday.
Watch the ads and decide for yourself. And while you're at it, you might as well watch NEI's latest ad too:



UPDATE: NEI's Scott Peterson shared this note on a similar experience NEI had several years back:
We've been down this road before in the U.S. after a challenge by NRDC of NEI's advertising in the late 1990s.

The NEI case was heard by the National Advertising Division of the Better Business Bureau and ultimately sent to the Federal Trade Commission, which in 1999 ruled that NEI was not engaged in unfair or deceptive advertising practices as alleged by NRDC.

The FTC’s ruling was appropriate given that the industry was simply exercising its right of free speech to provide information to policymakers about the benefits of nuclear technology.

NEI believed that its advertisements were appropriate first-amendment communications targeted to policymakers in forums that principally reach those who set national policy on energy and environmental issues.

We agreed with the FTC that our advertisements address important public policy matters in a manner targeted to reach legislators and other opinion leaders. As the FTC noted, the advertising was not directed to publications in states where consumers can choose their electricity suppliers.

It is undisputed that there are no greenhouse gas emissions from producing electricity at nuclear power plants. Although the NAD applied a lifecycle test to determine whether emissions resulting from the uranium fuel production process at a separate facility should be applied to the production of electricity, the FTC concluded that the NAD’s application of lifecycle analysis was inappropriate in the context of NEI’s advertising. [NEI did not make a lifecycle claim in the ad, therefore it is inappropriate to apply that test.]

In its Green Guides, FTC said in 1999 that “lifecycle analysis still is in its infancy and thus the commission lacks sufficient information on which to base guidance at this time.” FTC said NEI’s advertising does not require a lifecycle analysis.
Technorati tags: , , , , , , ,

Comments

Anonymous said…
Didn't the Federal Trade Commission order a series of NEI ads be pulled in 2000?
Anonymous said…
Please disregard my earlier comment regarding an FTC order in 2000 to pull NEI ads. A Boston
Globe
article appears to have been in error and it was picked up and repeated by others (or the Boston Globe simply repeated somebody else's error without fact checking).

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...