Green Nuclear Junk – reposted from DecarboniseSA

Ben Heard and Geoff Russell collaborated on a post for DecarboniseSA titled Green Nuclear Junk that takes careful aim at an antinuclear meme that is mostly based on a series of false assumptions that include a table of mortality figures made incorrect by dividing by 8.76 instead of multiplying by that same number.

With Ben’s permission, I have decided to publish another copy of his important article in hopes of increasing its exposure and generating a new series of comments. My goal is to add just a little more pressure on Jim Green — the national antinuclear campaigner for Friends of the Earth, Australia — to come clean and admit his mistakes. It would be even better if Green began to make amends for the environmental and economic damage caused by his antinuclear activism, but that is probably a futile hope.


Green Nuclear Junk

By Ben Heard and Geoff Russell

In their determination to attack nuclear power and those who support it, anti-nuclear activism has walked away from the scientific process. As a result, nearly the entire community of environmental organisations in Australia is currently standing behind figures that are completely mathematically incorrect. Will they correct these blatant errors and open their publications to expert external review? Or is correct maths and good science optional when you wear the colour green?

The great scientist Carl Sagan famously said that extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence. So how is it that Jim Green, an anti-nuclear campaigner with no scientific journal publications, can accuse James Hansen, one of the most extraordinary scientists of the last 50 years, of junk science?

In Green’s recent article “James Hansen’s nuclear junk science” he does precisely what good scientists don’t do. He cherry picks data.

For those who came in late, Pushker Kharecha and James Hansen recently calculated, in the journal Environmental Science and Technology, that the historic deployment of nuclear power had likely prevented 1.84 million air-pollution related deaths, and by mid-century would prevent a further 420,000 – 7.04 million such deaths.
Read more »

Platts Energy Week Discusses Jaczko’s odd announcement about reactor safety

Dr. Jaczko declined the invitation to participate in the Platts Energy Week discussion and more fully explain the position that he stated last week during a side session at the Carnegie International Nuclear Policy Conference. As was pointed out during the introductions in the above video, the side sessions were organized by different groups than [...]

Read more »

Was Arnie Gundersen a Licensed Reactor Operator and Senior VP Nuclear Licensee?

Arnie Gundersen has developed a pretty fair consulting business that consists of writing commissioned reports on a wide variety of nuclear energy topics and providing “expert witness” testimony. As a expert witness, he must to provide a resume to prove his expertise. He has published numerous reports including his analysis contradicting the efforts of dozens [...]

Read more »

Are Mark Cooper and Peter Bradford climate change deniers?

In a recent paper, Mark Cooper and Peter Bradford advocate expanded use of natural gas, even if that expansion requires using hydraulic fracturing. They believe that fossil fuel plants should continue dumping vast quantities of combustion waste into our shared atmosphere, even after new nuclear energy plants start operating. They dismiss the notion of a [...]

Read more »

Is Bill McKibben really serious about climate change?

Submarine Under Ice

Andy Revkin recently published a post on his Dot Earth blog titled A Communications Scholar Analyzes Bill McKibben’s Path on Climate. In one of the videos that is embedded in the article, Matthew Nisbet describes Bill McKibben as a public intellectual and compares his activism on climate to that of Rachel Carson on the effects [...]

Read more »

Virtual silence at “Golden Fleece” award news conference for SMRs

Taxpayers for Common Sense (TCS) trace their heritage to William Proxmire, a senator famous for his “Golden Fleece” awards for wasteful government spending. Yesterday, the organization held a press conference to announce that they had decided to award a Golden Fleece to the US Department of Energy SMR (small modular reactor) program. The press release [...]

Read more »

Groups fighting nuclear energy and advocating industrial wind and solar are not environmentalists!

Another Environmentalist for Nuclear Energy

I’m mad as hell and I don’t want to take it any more. Groups that fight any and all use of nuclear energy and also spend time advocating for the increased use of massive, industrial scale energy collectors on undeveloped, virgin land should NEVER be called “environmental groups”. I am not saying that the groups [...]

Read more »

Anti abundance is common link between anti GMO and anti nuclear

A couple of days ago, Mark Lynas, author of The God Species, gave an impassioned speech to the Oxford Farming Conference during which he apologized profusely for his former actions against genetically modified organisms (GMO). He stated that he now deeply regretted his participation in organized protests and direct actions to destroy experimental crops. He [...]

Read more »

NRC believes 1-2 year grid collapse in USA is credible scenario

On December 18, 2012, the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) published a notice in the Federal Register (74788-74798 vol, 77, No. 243) announcing that it would consider in the rulemaking process the issues raised in a petition (Docket No. PRM-50-96: NRC-2011-0069) asserting that existing regulations for civilian nuclear power facilities are inadequate to assure [...]

Read more »

Merchants of Doubt about nuclear energy

The vast majority of technical specialists in the field of energy production favor the use of nuclear energy and recognize that it is a safe source of power that produces no direct greenhouse gases. Even when measured on a complete lifecycle basis, CO2 emissions from nuclear energy are roughly equal to the emissions from wind [...]

Read more »

Theo Simon and George Monbiot – Rational discussion about nuclear energy development

During the past week or so, I have been spending quite a bit of time following a discussion about nuclear energy between Theo Simon and George Monbiot. It is a deeply philosophical engagement between two literate and concerned people who view nuclear energy through different lenses and have, so far, reached different conclusions about its [...]

Read more »