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...
Comments
James Greenidge
Queens NY
This is demonstrably false.
Moniz has chosen a long-time Union of Concerned "Scientists" wonk as his chief of staff. Despite the UCS's protestations to the contrary, the UCS has been stridently anti-nuclear in their entire ~40 year history. From their anti-nuclear ads in SciAm in the mid-late 70s to their spokesperson's whacky statement on NPR a few years ago, "Nuclear winter is not the answer to global warming" to every policy paper they've ever written that mentions nuclear.
If Moniz actually supported the expansion of nuclear power, he would not have chosen a person with absolutely no energy science credentials and nothing but anti-nuclear and anti-science policy credentials as his chief of staff.
But, hey, go on whistling if it makes you feel better over there in the dark.