Smoking gun – part 2 (Direct anti-nuclear political comment from coal supporter)
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…
The ‘smoking gun’ series on Atomic Insights provides links to articles that describe a direct anti-nuclear statement from someone who is openly supporting a competitive energy source. This afternoon, I received an anonymous tip with a link to an article in The Australian dated July 30, 2007 and titled Nuclear threatens our jobs: union. Here is the smoking gun part of the article:
Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union mining division boss Tony Maher warned yesterday that nuclear power would jeopardise job security for coal miners and power workers.
As his union launched an advertising campaign attacking the Howard Government’s greenhouse policy, Mr Maher said: “The real threat to coal miners’ job security and power workers’ job security is 25 nuclear reactors in Australia.
“That’s the harsh reality. A solar farm down the road is not going to close down a coal-fired power station. But 25 nuclear reactors will,” he told the Ten Network’s Meet The Press program.
I have a different analysis to offer. The nuclear industry’s need for employees who are willing to work hard and follow strict safety rules makes it likely that most, if not all coal mine and power workers would be able to find good jobs in a growing nuclear industry. If the union members take a hard look they will find that many of the jobs that the industry will create are terrific blue collar jobs that are often held by union workers.
The real potential losers in a growing nuclear industry are the capitalists that control equipment and land that is far less adaptable for new uses than human minds and hands. I started to use the word “own” instead of control in the previous sentence, but the fact is that a good deal of the capital equipment in the fossil fuel industry is heavily leveraged against future earning potential. If nuclear power was growing and taking market share, it would also pose a significant financial threat for the lenders who financed that equipment, land, and mineral rights.
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.
Conventional wisdom tells us that “Environmentalists” worried about one or more of the below complaints have influenced world opinion and encouraged the current negative investment perception that surrounds new nuclear power plants: Nuclear plants are not completely safe Nuclear energy technology leads to dispersal of nuclear weapons capability Nuclear energy plants are massive and lead…
Several times in the past week, I have pointed out just how much money is involved in pushing people to act in certain ways in response to the threat of global climate change. It seems so obvious to me that the most useful tool in shifting our economy to sustainability without emitting carbon dioxide into…
Dieter Helm’s The Carbon Crunch: How We’re Getting Climate Change Wrong–and How to Fix It has the potential to be an influential energy policy book, not just for the UK but for the rest of Europe and the United States. Helm has been making the rounds to promote the book and recently gave a concise…
In a break from its historical tactic of quietly enabling surrogates, the US petroleum industry has started to openly engage in battles to suppress use of atomic fission. The Ohio division of the American Petroleum Institute (API Ohio) recently issued a press release urging members of the “Ohio legislature to reject legislation that would subsidize…
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…
Every once in a while I come across articles that directly support the notion that much of the energy source debate is really a marketing battle, though the stated topic might be “energy security”, “environmental concerns”, or “global warming”. To their great credit, most engineers and scientists that I know are very straightforward people; they…