Skip to main content

The Party (x 2) Is Over

Now that the Democrats and Republicans have wrapped up their party conventions, let's review, shall we?

We heard from Senator McCain and Governor Palin a full endorsement of nuclear energy - it's in in the Republican mix without caveats - McCain even dinged Obama for not being a heartier supporter. (We spotlight the nuclear references in all the speeches a few posts down.)

Senators Obama and Biden, meanwhile, hedged on somewhat amorphous safety issues. We can let you speculate on the reasons for this; we'd guess Democrats are following the lead of the environmental wing of the party, although even that subset has softened considerably on nuclear in the last several years.

But the most striking thing is that all the major candidates voiced support for nuclear energy. This is the year nuclear energy got its long-deserved seat at the post-partisan dinner table (with perhaps no dessert from the Democrats) and no longer has to live in the dusty, locked attic with crazy Uncle Ernie. It's a signal change.

---

Last week, we pointed you to some ads NEI whipped up for the Democratic Convention version of The National Journal. Well, wouldn't you know - NEI did the same for the Republicans, too. Here's the link. They're the top-most items in the list.

Balloons. Amusingly, some of the floor reporters at last night's Republican National Convention wrap-up got swamped in the things.

Comments

Anonymous said…
I still won't vote Democrat. Not then. Not now. Not ever.
Anonymous said…
BTW, General Electric has gotten so many complaints about the liberal democrat bias of what passes for NBC that it is replacing Marxists Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews as news anchors. Seems like GE (partner of GE-Hitachi, maker of the ESBWR) is beginning to realize that GE-NBC has to be reigned in. Elect Obama and you can expect an anti-nuke for NRC chairman and an anti-nuke for DOE secretary. You NEI folks won't listen to me. You prefer to ingratiate yourselves with the liberals. That'll be your own undoing.
Joffan said…
Well, if we're getting political, it seems the Republicans will solve any power supply problems by continuing to bankrupt the country, so there'll be no industry or commerce that needs power. McCain is just more Bush. If you liked the last eight years, well, I guess you'll vote McCain.

Obama has been circumspect but positive (for a campaigning Democrat) about nuclear power. I think he'll be OK for nuclear once in the White House.
AlienToaster said…
Where is the report on the third-party candidates? I know that Ron Paul is a nuclear supporter, and he just endorsed the third-party candidates who are still running. Bob Barr, for one, is a strong supporter of nuclear. If nuclear power is a top issue for people like us, maybe voting neither Republican nor Democrat would be the way to go.

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 …

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…

Why Nuclear Plant Closures Are a Crisis for Small Town USA

Nuclear plants occupy an unusual spot in the towns where they operate: integral but so much in the background that they may seem almost invisible. But when they close, it can be like the earth shifting underfoot.

Lohud.com, the Gannett newspaper that covers the Lower Hudson Valley in New York, took a look around at the experience of towns where reactors have closed, because the Indian Point reactors in Buchanan are scheduled to be shut down under an agreement with Gov. Mario Cuomo.


From sea to shining sea, it was dismal. It wasn’t just the plant employees who were hurt. The losses of hundreds of jobs, tens of millions of dollars in payrolls and millions in property taxes depressed whole towns and surrounding areas. For example:

Vernon, Vermont, home to Vermont Yankee for more than 40 years, had to cut its municipal budget in half. The town closed its police department and let the county take over; the youth sports teams lost their volunteer coaches, and Vernon Elementary School lost th…