Skip to main content

Podcast of ANS's Vice President/President Elect

The American Nuclear Society's Dr. Burchill spoke to students at Vanderbilt University about...
...the factors that are producing the renaissance of nuclear power in the United States, the current status of that renaissance, and the challenges that it presents. These challenges include re-establishing the United States nuclear infrastructure, addressing proliferation concerns, building public confidence, licensing the Yucca Mountain High Level Waste Repository, and closing the nuclear fuel cycle.
You can listen here for the podcast.

Comments

Rod Adams said…
With all due respect to Dr. Burchill and the American Nuclear Society, this talk needs some serious fact checking.

I am listening to the talk and on minute 11 of 55 with the first five minutes or so being introductory.

So far, I have heard the following statements that are a bit less than accurate:

- The price of natural gas 10 years ago was about $2 per million standard cubic feet (the real number is either $2 per million BTU or $2 per thousand cubic feet),
- No one ever uses natural gas for baseload (and this is from a guy who used to teach at Texas A&M and lived in a state where the grid is more than 50% natural gas powered)
- Most of the 3% of the US electricity that comes from renewables is coming from homes where people feed the power back to the grid. The reality there is that about 2/3 of the "renewable" electricity in the US today comes from burning wood and wood waste to produce paper and from municipal solid waste to electricity plants.

Can someone please help Dr. Burchill provide better information to his important audiences?
David Bradish said…
Dr. Burchill also stated that the Comanche Peak units were the last two nuclear units to come online. Watts Bar 1 was actually the last unit to come online in 1996.
Dash said…
this is off topic, but I couldn't find an email link to send this story in. I found this article today and was wondering if this photo of Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant is doctored or photoshopped. http://www.tol.cz/look/TOL/article.tpl?IdLanguage=1&IdPublication=4&NrIssue=260&NrSection=4&NrArticle=19455

I don't know about you, but sure looks like an awful lot of black smoke above a nuclear plant.
David Bradish said…
dash, to me it looks like a storm above the nuclear plant. Here's the link to the story dash was referencing.

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 …

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…

Nuclear Is a Long-Term Investment for Ohio that Will Pay Big

With 50 different state legislative calendars, more than half of them adjourn by June, and those still in session throughout the year usually take a recess in the summer. So springtime is prime time for state legislative activity. In the next few weeks, legislatures are hosting hearings and calling for votes on bills that have been battered back and forth in the capital halls.

On Tuesday, The Ohio Public Utilities Committee hosted its third round of hearings on the Zero Emissions Nuclear Resources Program, House Bill 178, and NEI’s Maria Korsnick testified before a jam-packed room of legislators.


Washingtonians parachuting into state debates can be a tricky platform, but in this case, Maria’s remarks provided national perspective that put the Ohio conundrum into context. At the heart of this debate is the impact nuclear plants have on local jobs and the local economy, and that nuclear assets should be viewed as “long-term investments” for the state. Of course, clean air and electrons …