Skip to main content

NEI Launches "Future of Energy" Campaign

Marv Fertel
The following is a guest post from NEI’s President and CEO, Marv Fertel.

By its very nature, diversity is an attribute that we desire.  Regardless of whether it’s the diversity of ideas, the colleagues with whom we work, or the options in any given strategy, diversity should be championed.
On the concept of diversity, most people ”get it,” but few recognize when we are on a path to lose it.

Such is the case in the electric sector. Many energy leaders from the Department of Energy, state public utility commissioners and other regulators only recently have begun to recognize the potential erosion of diversity in our electric supply system. This is due to the closure of base load power plants, including significant coal-fired production. Four nuclear reactors have shut down in the past year and others are at risk in competitive markets that have become skewed by layers of policy decisions. 

Maintaining diversity of supply is a theme of a new NEI campaign, aimed on communicating the need for a balanced energy portfolio as well as underscoring the value proposition of nuclear energy in that mix. In the process of building a 21st Century electric grid, we must hold to the virtue of diversity of technology and fuels.

Nuclear energy has proven its mettle in that mix.
 
Today, Greenpeace Co-founder Patrick Moore, Transatomic Power Chief Scientist Leslie Dewan, and Georgia Power’s Mark Verbeck, who is managing the training of reactor operators at the state-of-the-art Vogtle reactors under construction, will join me at the National Press Club today at 10:00 a.m. ET, to talk about the future of nuclear energy, its clean air benefits and considerable economic development that accrues to communities and states with new reactor projects. We'll be live streaming the event via UStream.


This is only the start of a conversation that we must have on several levels, and I’m pleased that Leslie, Patrick, Mark and Vicky Bailey, former assistant secretary at the Energy Department and an industry leader for two decades, are joining with us communicate the importance of these issues.

Comments

Except for the part about coal, I pretty much liked this ad. But such ads need to be on every television network-- not simply preaching to the choir.

Nuclear advocates also need to be be ready to aggressively defend themselves against those who falsely believe that natural gas and renewable energy is the ultimate answer to our total energy needs. And that may mean clearly pointing out the environmental dangers of natural gas and the capacity limitations and some of the deleterious environmental impacts of renewable energy systems such as hydroelectric, wind and solar.

Marcel
Anonymous said…
Making the campaign "nuclear against all other sources," as suggested here, could make it much harder to build constituencies in support of nuclear power.
Engineer-Poet said…
Yes, but nuclear vs. fraccing could get a lot of traction.  There is a lot of ill-will against fraccing, with the flammable well water and the illegal disposal of brine and all the rest.

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 …