Skip to main content

Amory Lovins and His Nuclear Illusion – Intro

Amory Lovins and the Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) just released a 52 page paper (pdf) ranting that nuclear power is “not all it’s cracked up to be”. The report claims that the nuclear industry is misleading people that nuclear power is “competitive, necessary, reliable, secure, and vital for fuel security and climate protection.”

I’ve read and studied RMI’s claims and their “methodology”. From my examination of Lovins’ sources, it appears that many of his conclusions and claims are based on selective readings. When those readings are taken in context, they lead to very different conclusions than are presented by Mr. Lovins.

Over the next two weeks I will explain why I believe the RMI paper adds little value to the current public debate about energy policy. In the blog posts to follow, I will also show you the overall picture of how much energy we consume, how much efficiency can contribute, which energies are really making a difference, what RMI’s “solutions” really supply, and what’s up with their favorite, “micropower.”

While I disagree with much of the paper, I have gained a new appreciation for some of Amory Lovins’ and RMI’s ideas. I am a big fan of energy efficiency and I think decentralized sources of energy and cogeneration provide some great benefits. With that being said, I want to ensure that you understand the errors and limitations I found in Mr. Lovins’ latest proposals so that you can decide for yourself how seriously to take his “Nuclear Illusion”.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Looking forward to reading your posts.
Anonymous said…
Indeed. I'm also looking forward to a look back at your archives, where we'll be able to see a clear pattern on behalf of RMI and Amory Lovins when it comes to cooking the books with their "research".
Anonymous said…
While I too am a supporter of energy conservation (who isn't?) but let's differentiate between voluntary conservation and legal mandates, either direct or hidden.

The first category is both a rational calculation based on individual situations and a moral virtue ("waste not, want not.") Free markets are good at this - watch as GM shifts productions from big SUVs and trucks to smaller cars in response to cutomers' demands.

The second category is more difficult to defend, based as it is on government coercion. The hated 55 mph speed limit was enforced on the highways by men with guns on the government payroll.

A subset of that second category exists and may be justified where the one making decisions affecting operating energy costs is not the one paying for the operating energy costs. My prime example of this is the new California Energy Commission rule in Title 24 that limits the water velocity in swimming pool filter and heating systems. A pool salesman is motivated to cut the first costs of installation by using smaller pipes yet a little extra money spent in bigger pipes saves the ultimate owner a lot on electric costs of operation.

This is a useful arena for building codes. Unfortunately, we've seen this relatively hidden avenue abused by devotees of people like Lovins and government bureaucrats.
Anonymous said…
As you finish your posts on this subject, I'd ask you to make sure you give sufficient attention to energy efficiency and cogeneration, as you mention. Whether nuclear power should be a bigger part of our energy mix is a fine question, with good arguments on both sides. Whether current power plants should continue their gross inefficiency -- throwing out two-thirds of their fuel before the electricity even hits the grid -- should not be. I'm associated with Recycled Energy Development (recycled-energy.com), a company that does cogeneration and waste heat recovery for manufacturers. The fact is that the current system is inexcusable, with regulations protecting monopoly electric utilities and making it difficult for more efficient options to emerge. The market must become more free; the result would be lower energy costs AND greenhouse emissions, since that's what cogeneration does.

Popular posts from this blog

Why Ex-Im Bank Board Nominations Will Turn the Page on a Dysfunctional Chapter in Washington

In our present era of political discord, could Washington agree to support an agency that creates thousands of American jobs by enabling U.S. companies of all sizes to compete in foreign markets? What if that agency generated nearly billions of dollars more in revenue than the cost of its operations and returned that money – $7 billion over the past two decades – to U.S. taxpayers? In fact, that agency, the Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank), was reauthorized by a large majority of Congress in 2015. To be sure, the matter was not without controversy. A bipartisan House coalition resorted to a rarely-used parliamentary maneuver in order to force a vote. But when Congress voted, Ex-Im Bank won a supermajority in the House and a large majority in the Senate. For almost two years, however, Ex-Im Bank has been unable to function fully because a single Senate committee chairman prevented the confirmation of nominees to its Board of Directors. Without a quorum

An Ohio School Board Is Working to Save Nuclear Plants

Ohio faces a decision soon about its two nuclear reactors, Davis-Besse and Perry, and on Wednesday, neighbors of one of those plants issued a cry for help. The reactors’ problem is that the price of electricity they sell on the high-voltage grid is depressed, mostly because of a surplus of natural gas. And the reactors do not get any revenue for the other benefits they provide. Some of those benefits are regional – emissions-free electricity, reliability with months of fuel on-site, and diversity in case of problems or price spikes with gas or coal, state and federal payroll taxes, and national economic stimulus as the plants buy fuel, supplies and services. Some of the benefits are highly localized, including employment and property taxes. One locality is already feeling the pinch: Oak Harbor on Lake Erie, home to Davis-Besse. The town has a middle school in a building that is 106 years old, and an elementary school from the 1950s, and on May 2 was scheduled to have a referendu

New Home for Our Blog: Join Us on NEI.org

On February 27, NEI launched the new NEI.org . We overhauled the public site, framing all of our content around the National Nuclear Energy Strategy. So, what's changed? Our top priority was to put you, the user, first. Now you can quickly get the information you need.  You'll enjoy visiting the site with its intuitive navigation, social media integration and compelling and shareable visuals.  We've added a feature called Nuclear Now, which showcases the latest industry news and resources like fact sheets and reports. It's one of the first sections you'll see on our home page and it can be accessed anywhere throughout the site by clicking on the atom symbol in the top right corner of the page. Most importantly for you, our loyal NEI Nuclear Notes readers, is that we've migrated the blog to the new site. Moving forward,  all blog posts will be published in the News section , along with our press releases, Nuclear Energy Overview stories and more. Just l