Skip to main content

"The Solar Industry Doesn't Need the Sierra Club."

The quote of the day that's getting passed around this morning at NEI comes from Suzzanne Shelton of the Shelton Group. She was in attendance last week at Fortune's Brainstorm Green 2014, and shared her top five takeaways from the conference on her blog before the start of the long holiday weekend.


Not surprisingly, this aside involved Mike Shellenberger of the Breakthrough Institute and his ongoing struggle to get other environmentalists to understand that constraining carbon emissions and keeping the lights on is going to mean relying on a diverse set of energy sources that includes nuclear energy:
The solar industry doesn't need the Sierra Club. There was a very interesting point/counterpoint discussion between Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club, and Michael Shellenberger, president of the Breakthrough Institute. It appears the two men are/were friends, and Shellenberger was practically doing an on-stage intervention with Brune, begging him to stop embarrassing himself by being so quixotically focused on supporting only solar and wind as the way forward, without consideration at all for natural gas in the short term and nuclear in the long term. Based on other panel discussions (and what we're seeing in market data), renewables are doing really, really well and will continue to do well. So perhaps it's time for the Sierra Club to focus its considerable energy on another fight.
As long-time readers of NEI Nuclear Notes know, this isn't the first time someone has petitioned the Sierra Club to come to the table to discuss practical solutions to environmental challenges. Nope, not at all.

UPDATE: Thanks to Jessica Lovering of The Breakthrough Institute, we've got the link to the video of the exchange between Shellenberger and Michael Brune of the Sierra Club:



For more, please visit The Breakthrough Institute.

Comments

jimwg said…
Maybe the real question is, would the solar and wind camps ever declare in one breath that we need nuclear to at least take up their slack on still windless nights? Unless they say THAT, it doesn't matter what green groups they're having hissy-fits with, they're still anti-nuke.

James Greenidge
Queens NY
Solar advocates pretend to be concerned about the relatively tiny amount of toxic waste produced from spent fuel by the nuclear industry yet the production of photovoltaics produces tens of thousands of times more toxic waste than the nuclear industry.

http://www.thingsworsethannuclearpower.com/2012/09/the-real-waste-problem-solar-edition.html

Marcel
jimwg said…
If "Nuclear Matters" (http://www.nuclearmatters.com) wishes to make a difference in stemming the tide of nuclear plant closures it's going to have to steer off the well-beaten futile path to Capital Hill. My first question to them: How large is your mass nuclear publicity and education till and how can your supporters directly contribute to IT? Two, what types of mass media nuclear education programs do you have in mind and when and what (Ad) agency is performing it? Deuce Sweet. Forget the seemingly logical path of "enlightening" or buttering up politicians to our side; You have to be pragmatically street-wise here and take the "Mad Men" route here -- directly hit the FUD-drenched public with your pitch, NOT after wallflower politicians who will just follow where the public wind blows. You have to stem the breach and bleeding antis inflict by hitting FUD back with hard-core adult nuclear education at the same volume the antis have successfully plied theirs. Blogs are very noble efforts but Kellogg and General Motors and other corporations never scored their mega sales or product recognition this way-- only mass media education will do, and the media's grass-roots battleground for minds and reason is where the fight for fact over fear and truth over lies must be fought. Nuclear Matters, don't avail a tired old road -- unclueless and educate a skittish public who don't know the difference between a solar system and a galaxy about nuclear power! Mass media nuclear education Ads is the way to go! I can't afford much but I'll splurge it to you IF I knew that's exactly where my contribution's going!

James Greenidge
Queens NY
Dan Williamson said…
Along those lines, has NEI ever lobbied Showtime or HBO to air "Pandora's Promise?" Those outlets seem perfectly willing to air documentary films....mainly of a leftward tilt. What does it take to get that done?
Dan Williamson said…
Hmmmm....I guess that CAN'T be done.

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 …