Skip to main content

Moore Calls on Greenpeace to Support Nuclear

Co-founder of Greenpeace and leading environmentalist Patrick Moore encouraged his former organization to support nuclear energy at a speech yesterday at Wits University in South Africa. Here is the account from The Times of South Africa:

Greenpeace should now go pro-nuke

Radioactive waste ‘no longer a problem’

Greenpeace was right to stop the bomb and save the whales, but should never have opposed nuclear energy, the environmental group’s co-founder and former director, Patrick Moore, said in Sandton yesterday.

Moore is on a lecture tour of local universities, sponsored by the Nuclear Industry Association of South Africa.

“Climate change has made me a strong supporter of nuclear power,” Moore said.

Here is another account by Engineering News Online of South Africa: Greenpeace co-founder Moore backs nuclear power.

A blog sponsored by South Africa's Mail & Guardian had a less sanguine viewpoint about building more nuclear power plants.

Despite the wide range of opinions, nuclear energy is making a comeback in countries outside the United States. South Africa has joined a long list of countries now considering building new nuclear power plants.

Several blogs continue to argue that Moore is not credible because he is paid by the nuclear industry. However, Moore's viewpoints on nuclear energy preceded his association with the industry. He believes expansion of nuclear power is the best way to combat climate change--he would say this regardless of who signs his paychecks. I would imagine that Greenpeace employees believed in the organization's mission before receiving their own paychecks.

The problem for organizations that continue to oppose nuclear energy is that it is one of the best options for meeting our growing electricity needs without producing significant additional greenhouse gases. Thus the existence of people like Patrick Moore who are both bona fide environmentalists and support nuclear, is a constant reminder of a different perspective.

Finally, if you are looking for more background, you can check another great profile by Politico on Why a Greenpeace co-founder went nuclear.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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…

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 …

A Billion Miles Under Nuclear Energy (Updated)

And the winner is…Cassini-Huygens, in triple overtime.

The spaceship conceived in 1982 and launched fifteen years later, will crash into Saturn on September 15, after a mission of 19 years and 355 days, powered by the audacity and technical prowess of scientists and engineers from 17 different countries, and 72 pounds of plutonium.

The mission was so successful that it was extended three times; it was intended to last only until 2008.

Since April, the ship has been continuing to orbit Saturn, swinging through the 1,500-mile gap between the planet and its rings, an area not previously explored. This is a good maneuver for a spaceship nearing the end of its mission, since colliding with a rock could end things early.

Cassini will dive a little deeper and plunge toward Saturn’s surface, where it will transmit data until it burns up in the planet’s atmosphere. The radio signal will arrive here early Friday morning, Eastern time. A NASA video explains.

In the years since Cassini has launc…