Smoking gun – part 1 (Direct anti-nuclear business comment from coal supporter)
One of the themes that I continue to pursue is the fact that the established energy industry has the means, motive and opportunity needed to be a silent partner in…
Back on 14 January 2006, I posted a comment titled “Smoking gun – part 1” in which I told you that I would be on the look out for nuclear opposition that can be directly tied to the desires of competitive industries to maintain their market share. Though there is enough circumstantial evidence out there to convince me that fossil fuel interests are often behind anti-nuclear groups, there is not a good source of evidence that can persuade those that doubt my assertions.
Here is a second installment, in an article published on Thursday, 16 March 2006 by ABC (Australian Broadcasting Company) online titled Beattie urged to rethink uranium mining opposition.
Australia, owner of the world’s largest proven reserve of uranium also has a very large coal mining industry with a large export market and a huge reserve base. Geographically, this store of coal is quite close to key markets in Asia and provides large quantities of useful currency from the international trade. As might be expected, this industry provides a substantial number of jobs, provides the income for some large and profitable companies and has a strong base of political support. One of the supporters is a man named Peter Beattie, the Premier of Queensland.
Despite strong arguments from industry and labor organizations that have tried to convince him that uranium mining and coal mining can coexist in his state, he remains opposed to uranium mining developments. Here is his quote from the article:
Mr Beattie says the coal industry has a long-term future with 300 years of deposits in reserve.
“If power is being generated by uranium we don’t need enough coal. I mean this is … black and white – I am a strong supporter of the coal industry, I’m a strong supporter of clean coal technology and I do not support the uranium industry because it will be a competing energy source,” he said.
Well, that seems pretty darned clear to me. At least the man is honest in his opposition, which is always refreshing.
Rod Adams is Managing Partner of Nucleation Capital, a venture fund that invests in advanced nuclear, which provides affordable access to this clean energy sector to pronuclear and impact investors. Rod, a former submarine Engineer Officer and founder of Adams Atomic Engines, Inc., which was one of the earliest advanced nuclear ventures, is an atomic energy expert with small nuclear plant operating and design experience. He has engaged in technical, strategic, political, historic and financial analysis of the nuclear industry, its technology, regulation, and policies for several decades through Atomic Insights, both as its primary blogger and as host of The Atomic Show Podcast. Please click here to subscribe to the Atomic Show RSS feed. To join Rod's pronuclear network and receive his occasional newsletter, click here.
Recently an Atomic Insights reader shared a document that inspired a new line of thinking about the chronology of atomic energy development. The inspirational document was a PDF copy of a chapter titled Little Red Schoolhouse from Freeman Dyson‘s memoir, Disturbing the Universe. It was a brief tale about a memorable burst of creativity in…
In my continuing efforts to produce a narrative about the way that the public was taught to be afraid of ionizing radiation, no matter how low the dose, I came across an interesting write up in the Rockefeller Foundation Annual Report for 1958. Here is some important temporal context. The Foundation Board of Trustees asked…
We’ve been repeatedly told that 97% of climate scientists agree that CO2 emissions from human activity are a major cause of climate change. Scientists who question that assertion are villified as “climate change deniers” and marginalized as representing a fringe point of view. They’re frequently accused of being paid by fossil fuel interests. Politicians, journalists…
It’s been a while since my last ‘smoking gun’ report so it might be worth a brief reminder of what that categorization means. For Atomic Insights, the tag ‘smoking gun’ means a story that includes evidence of fossil fuel related interests working to oppose nuclear energy development, usually at a specific project. Some of the…
Watch the latest business video at video.foxbusiness.com Jerry Taylor of the Cato Institute, a self proclaimed libertarian think tank, recently visited Fox Business to explain his opposition to nuclear energy. The episode was on the Stossel Show and is called Nuclear Power: Republican Junk Economics?. If you listen really closely, you will hear him using…
I love honest people. Engaging in straightforward discussions and even arguments is one of my favorite pastimes. This morning, I opened up my copy of Chesapeake Energy’s annual report and read the following clear statement of objectives: Some of the great public debates of the next 10 years will focus on how we should meet…