Skip to main content

Anyone Listening to Dr. Caldicott Anymore?

Doesn’t look like it. Apparently she’s trying to create controversy with many in the environmental community over nuclear. Maybe nuclear really isn’t as bad as she believes . . .

Comments

DV8 2XL said…
Caldicott has become irrelevant, her particular brand of hyperbole is now passe. Even in antinuclear circles she no longer commands the respect she once did.
Anonymous said…
Never underestimate the power of zealots, especially when the mainstream media is on their side.

If an energy bill with strong nuclear provisions approaches passage, she and her ilk may come roaring back.
Anonymous said…
especially when the mainstream media is on their side.

this inaccurate cliche is getting tired. maybe this was true right after TMI, but most nuclear power stories in the MSM today are quite balanced, pointing out that many support a "nuclear renaissance" to help address global warming. Patrick Moore and James Lovelock quoted everywhere, NEI quoted everywhere. So where's this supposed media bias?

Unless by "on their side" you mean that not every MSM outlet (except possibly Fox) is not rabidly and exclusively PRO-nuclear.
gmax137 said…
I just read the comments on the linked piece. If you want yet more examples of what the anti-nukes are saying, go read them yourself. They are basically closed minds repeating the same old stuff over & over again, with a sprinkling of back-to-nature decentralizers & doomers. So while Dr Caldicott may be on the marginalizing slope, she still has followers ("Helen is a genius...")
Bozena said…
Dr. Caldicott is not only right, but should be considered the SAINT of this Earth. I just can not believe how many people are ignorant on the subject of nuclear energy..., not knowing that nuclear power plants produce deadly radioactive wastes, that will be active for thousands of years!!! and if we will not stop nuclear industry right now we'll destroy Life on Earth completely !!! and our duty is to protect it!!!

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 …