Skip to main content

Breaking Bread with a Pro-Nuclear Blogger

By Eric McErlain
It's been a busy week filled with meetings and other responsibilities that have kept me away from blogging, but I wanted to take a few moments to write about a lunch meeting that my colleague David Bradish and I had earlier today with N Nadir, the famous pro-nuclear blogger who conducts his business over at Daily Kos.

As many of our readers know, we've been pointing to Nadir's (not his real name) posts at DailyKos for some time now, at times astonished at the sort of support nuclear energy can enjoy at a traditionally progressive blog like that one.

Then again, Nadir told me he wasn't surprised, as has been seeing a movement of a number of Democrats and others of a progressive political stripe give nuclear energy a second, and enthusiastic look.

We had a very interesting lunch, and Nadir passed along some advice that I'm sure to take to heart when it comes to confronting our industry's foes. In particular, Nadir made it clear that we needed to be more, not less confrontational, and just a bit more edgy when it comes to our presentation.

Simply put, he gave us a lot to think about, and I hope we did too.

It was great to take the jump and meet Nadir face-to-face as we have with Rod Adams and John Wheeler. Here's hoping we might do it again soon with another member of the nuclear energy community online.
Labels:

Comments

Randal Leavitt said…
You may be interested in my blog too:

http://positiveenergy.blogspot.com/

(No need to publish this comment. I just wanted to let you know about the above URL.)
June 1, 2007 at 9:55 PM
Rod Adams said…
Eric:

You and your readers might be interested in hearing the most recent episode of The Atomic Show Podcast. The evening before NNadir visited with you in Washington, he dropped by Atomic HQ for a chat about a Liberal View of Atomic Energy.

Like you, we also had a fascinating conversation about how to tell our story and how to respond to people who are focused on spreading anti-nuclear rubbish.

I gave you full credit for introducing us through NEI Nuclear Notes. You are providing a great service as the hub of the pro-nuclear blogging community.
June 2, 2007 at 4:41 AM
Anonymous said…
Why would any one be astonished to see support for nuclear power at a progressive website? What could be more progressive than support for nuclear power, and what could be more regressive than opposition to nuclear power?
June 2, 2007 at 10:43 AM
Anonymous said…
The word "progressive" used in the description of the Kos website is the codeword used by radical leftists to identify themselves without alarming people who are not poltical junkies.
June 3, 2007 at 11:30 AM
Anonymous said…
Yes, I understand the use of the word "progressive" at DailyKos. I had my tongue firmly in cheek when I made my original comment. Using the actual definition of the word progressive, however, it is fair to say that nothing is more progressive than nuclear power.
June 3, 2007 at 10:56 PM
Space Fission said…
If you plan to visit Yellowstone or Grand Teton National Parks this summer, we're just two hours south of Yellowstone or the same travel time east of Jackson, WY.

Visitors to Idaho Falls, ID, are welcome anytime to discuss nuclear issues. See us on the web at: http://djysrv.blogspot.com
Idaho Samizdat Nuke Notes
June 4, 2007 at 10:20 AM
Anonymous said…
"the codeword used by radical leftists to identify themselves without alarming people who are not poltical junkies."

In much the same way that extremely radical right-wing causes label themselves as "conservative"
June 4, 2007 at 11:20 AM
Anonymous said…
Anonymous asserted, "In much the same way that extremely radical right-wing causes label themselves as 'conservative'"

That would have hardly any effect because all conservatives are considered to support extremely radical right wing causes.
June 4, 2007 at 6:51 PM
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

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

How Much Land Does Nuclear, Wind and Solar Really Need?

By
Not too long ago, we reviewed a report that looked at nuclear energy (and other energy sources) as biodiversity agents. This had to do, in part, with the amount of land a facility needs to function. Nuclear energy and fossil fuel plants use relatively little, wind farms and solar arrays quite a lot of land . Based on an objective and transparent analysis of our sustainable energy choices, we have come to the evidence-based conclusion that nuclear energy is a good option for biodiversity conservation (and society in general) and that other alternatives to fossil fuels should be subjected to the same cost–benefit analyses (in terms of biodiversity and climate outcomes, as well as sociopolitical imperatives) before accepting or dismissing them. Writer Barry Brook, who collected 75 scientists to endorse his paper, is interested in land use as it impacts flora and fauna. Biodiversity concerns do not get as much play as they might – and, when they do, it annoys many when land is withdraw...
4 comments
Read more