Skip to main content

Inauguration Parade Route News

By
If you're one of the estimated 2 million people expected to brave the cold and descend upon Washington, D.C. this weekend for the inauguration ceremonies, you may encounter one of these NEI ads along your travels.

inauguration-parade-routeThe ad, Nuclear Energy is a Cool Way to Reduce Global Warming, can be found on 25 different bus stands along the inauguration parade route and throughout the city. Willing to take your hands out of your pockets long enough to take a photograph of the Polar Bear ad? Send them into us here and we'll get 'em up on the blog.

Labels:

Comments

Rod Adams said…
I like the ad. Any chance of being able to purchase a poster sized version?

Rod Adams
January 19, 2009 at 3:13 PM
Anonymous said…
Every time the nuclear industry uses the disproven theory of global warming to advance their agenda, their integrity, credibility and intelligence takes another hit. When the superstition of global warming is finally exposed and accepted by most Americans (44% currently consider non-human effects to be the cause of temperature cycles) what will NEI say to regain credibility? NEI needs to have some major re-education on the global warming theory and its imminent disappearance. They are doing themselves and the future of nuclear power a grave disservice.

44% Say Global Warming Due To Planetary Trends, Not People
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/issues2/articles/44_say_global_warming_due_to_planetary_trends_not_people

More info at The Greenie Watch
http://antigreen.blogspot.com/
January 21, 2009 at 5:17 PM
Angela said…
Mike - The nuclear industry could go back to the fact that nuclear is also the cheapest to produce, creates good jobs, and doesn't require that we knock the tops off of mountains to fuel them. It could maybe use the fact that electrification of our transportation system is probably the only way to move away from importing billions of barrels of oil every year. It could use these, and many other arguments to get itself a good image. I'm just happy that somebody in the industry decided it needed to advertise and do public relations.
January 22, 2009 at 10:57 PM
Anonymous said…
This is an effort to revive "Our Friend the Atom" and clearly as misinformed.
January 26, 2009 at 5:38 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

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

By
Several weeks ago Joshua Pearce at Clarion University in Pennsylvania released a study titled “ Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy deployment as a greenhouse gas mitigation technology .” In the study he stated... nuclear energy production would have to increase by 10.5% per year from 2010 to 2050 to both replace fossil-fuel-energy use and meet the future energy demands. This line, of course, made the headlines and has been picked up by several outlets and blogs . When looking into his calculations for this statement, he made one assumption error that overstated the above sentence by nearly a factor of three. Page 121, Section 4.1 of the study states: Richard Smalley pointed out that in 2004, the global economy consumed the equivalent of 220 million barrels of oil per day, which converted into electricity terms is the equivalent of 14.5 TeraWatts (TW), or 14,500,000 MegaWatts (MW) (2005). … With a nuclear plant having about 1000 MW (1 GW) of capacity, we would need 14,500...
7 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