Skip to main content

14th Carnival of Nuclear Energy: Random Topics and Big Equations

image This week we get to host the nuclear carnival for the second time since it began. To start off, Charles Barton at Nuclear Green recruited NNadir (former DKos diarist) to share a post. NNadir back in the day wrote some of the most random but fun pieces about nuclear including bits on cesium, technetium and even lutefisk. In his first piece at Nuclear Green, NNadir discussed a number of topics including “one of [his] favorite things to do”: discredit Amory Lovins (he’s definitely not alone in that passion). Hope to see more from him.

Speaking of Lovins, Brian Wang at Next Big Future rehashed and debunked some of Lovins’ old predictions from the 1970s. As well, Wang reported that his bet with another blogger on increased uranium production in Kazakhstan for 2010 and 2011 is “looking very good.”

After debunking it two weeks ago, Rod Adams at Atomic Insights continued to “tamp down the spread of NC Warn sponsored misinformation regarding the comparison of solar and nuclear costs”. Also, check out his recap of the first day at the American Nuclear Society Utility Working Conference, looked like a good time.

Dan Yurman at Idaho Samizdat has the news about US agreements with Vietnam to share enrichment technology. Some members of Congress aren’t quite happy about the agreement and it has China keeping a close eye. As well, be sure to check out some of Dan’s nuclear videos posted Monday, the third one about Diet Coke and Mentos is quite entertaining.

Kirk Sorensen at Energy From Thorium wrote a dense three part piece titled: Enrichment, or how I learned to stop worrying and love the SWU. It’s always good to work out your brain with some calculations every once in awhile.

Barry Brook at Brave New Climate shared a pamphlet that his sister created for him highlighting the good features of nuclear.

Stephen Aplin at Canadian Energy Issues discussed an option with dealing with CO2 once it’s been captured from fossil plants. He doesn’t think sequestration will work but instead we should use the captured CO2 to create a liquid hydrocarbon for fuel similar to gasoline and diesel.

With all of the number of reactor designs out there, is there one that’s the best? Gail Marcus at Nuke Power Talk has been on the search and found a good article that compared the positives and negatives of the different designs.

Meredith Angwin at Yes Vermont Yankee got into the philosophical debate on energy use: how much is too much? what’s wasteful vs. what’s efficiency? and more.

And from NEI, we have two things we’d like to highlight: if you haven’t read our post from earlier this week debunking an anti group’s egregious claims, check it out; and, let us know what you think about our new Myths and Facts doc debunking 35 commonly heard nuclear myths.

Make sure to stop by everyone’s place.

Promo pic for the Myths and Facts document.

Comments

Kirk Sorensen said…
Thanks for the mention, Dave! I put up part 4 in the series on enrichment tonight.

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 …