Skip to main content

Kadak, Meserve, Todreas and Wilson Endorse Call of Climate Scientists to Expand Use of Nuclear Energy

Richard Meserve
Our readers will recall that last Fall, a group of scientists led by Dr. James Hansen of of Columbia University’s Earth Institute, issued an open letter endorsing an expansion of the use of nuclear energy in order to help combat climate change.

Earlier today, Andrew Revkin of the New York Times published another open letter, this one signed by former NRC Chairman Dick Meserve, among others, applauding the actions of those four scientists and endorsing the same course of action on expanding nuclear energy.
The energy needs of the world are large and growing. The one billion people that do not even have access to electricity cannot be denied the ability to improve their quality of life. Nuclear energy provides a scaleable, clean source of safe power which, with other clean energy sources, can meet the world's needs in a sustainable manner. We applaud and support the efforts of the climate scientist authors of the originally cited letter. Drs. Caldeira, Emanuel, Hansen and Wigley, for bringing the issue of the need for nuclear power to the world environmental community and policy leaders.
The other three signatories to the letter are: former American Nuclear Society President Andrew Kadak; Neil Todreas, Former Chairman of the Department of Nuclear Science and Engineering at MIT; and Richard Wilson, former Chairman of the Department of Physics at Harvard University. Click here to read the full text of the letter.

Comments

jimwg said…
Signing letters is nice and fine but why not broadcast even a two or three shot public appeal for supporters and academic backing on some TV markets? Surly the organizations concerned can pass the cup around and cash in for 30-second TV and radio spots which will do great service as a heads-up to the public and colleges that such a vital environmental-energy issue is happening under their radar. I mean if PUPPY RESCUE can afford cable TY spots in major markets like NYC-metro...

Like I'm REALLY tired of seeing Michio Kaku spin his glib FUD totally unchallenged!

James Greenidge
Queens NY
You could easily replace base-load electricity production from fossil fuels with carbon neutral nuclear power by simply increasing the production of electricity at existing nuclear sites. This can be done by gradually adding small nuclear reactors to each existing site over the course of two or three decades.

The more than 60 nuclear sites in the US could easily accommodate capacities up to 8GWe electric without significant heat island problems.

The production of hydrogen during off-peak hours by nuclear power plants could be used to substantially increase carbon neutral bio-methanol production from urban and rural biowaste.

This carbon neutral methanol could be used in slightly modified gas turbines for the production of peak-load electricity. Such turbines actually produce electricity more efficiently than natural gas.

Marcel

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 …