Atomic Show #211 – Happy Nuke Year 2014
On January 1, 2014, I asked several nuclear communicators to join me for a discussion about highlights of 2013 and predictions for 2013. We had a lively discussion about the change in the conversation about nuclear energy stimulated by the release of Pandora’s Promise, the impact of the court decision telling the NRC to restart its review of the Yucca Mountain license application, the uncertainty regarding the effect of a court’s decision about the continued collection of waste fees by the DOE, and the change in attitude within the nuclear industry about the importance of continuous communications stimulated by the permanent shut down of four formerly operating nuclear plants and the decision to stop refueling one more nuclear plant in 2014.
Guests on the show include:
Meredith Angwin, who blogs at Yes Vermont Yankee and runs the Energy Education Project at the Ethan Allen Institute
Gwyneth Cravens, author of Power to Save the World, The Truth About Nuclear Energy
Steve Aplin, who blogs at Canadian Energy Issues and has developed an important measure of effectiveness for judging electricity supply systems – CIPK (CO2 intensity per kilowatt hour)
Les Corrice, who blogs at Hiroshima Syndrome, where, among other topics, he produces the twice weekly Fukushima Accident Update. His updates are the most accessible compilation of factual reports on the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station on the web.
Suzy Hobbs-Baker, the director of PopAtomic Studios and the leader of the Nuclear Literacy Project.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 1:28:33 — 40.7MB)
Subscribe: Google Podcasts | RSS
To Les Corrice,
Getting desperate. When do you think a nuke will restart ?
I think Japan’s NRA is doing a poor communication job despite their promise to be transparent.
South Korea has restarted 5 or 6 reactors since they were shut down in May.
Has the NRC infiltrated Japan’s NRA ?
Daniel,
Japan’s NRA said this morning that we should not expect a restart in the near future. The NRA says additional earthquake consideration must be given by all plants. The NRA has a record of being earthquake-phobic, and this just adds more fuel to the fire.
Perhaps 2014 will be the year nuclear dreamers rid themselves of stupid ideas like:
1. Seawater extraction of uranium
2. MSR’s
3. SMR’s
4. Fusion
and address the the important issue of construction problems of large LWR’s and the economics of nuclear systems in general.
@Starving:
“Perhaps 2014 will be the year nuclear dreamers rid themselves of stupid ideas like…”
Perhaps 2014 will be the year the nuclear blogosphere rids itself of whiney trolls like you. Fiat money, water fluoridation, vaccination, the Obàmolech, central banking, and nuclear energy are all here to stay, like’em or not.
One nuclear film doesnot make a nuclear summer: Many people do not know enough about nuclear power to make the right decision. The International Uranium Film Festival screens dozens of independent films about nuclear power that informs about all issues and all risks of nuclear power. Soon in NYC Brooklyn in February.
Thanks for your attention.
Norbert Suchanek
http://www.uraniumfilmfestival.org/index.php/en/
New York Brooklyn Program:
http://www.paviliontheater.com/?p=content…
Hi Norbert,
Your festival seems like it has a pretty one-sided negative view of everything nuclear.
Going to a film festival that is simply an echo chamber for one’s prejudices sounds pretty boring.
The exciting thing at the Sundance film Festival where “Pandora’s Promise” was premiered was that it challenged the preconceptions of its audiences and sparked passionate discussions afterwards.
Perhaps your festival’s selection committee should broaden its perspective for a more interesting experience.
Apparently many people don’t know enough about nuclear power to make a documentary either.
Unfortunately the more one learns about it the more one realizes what a bad idea it was all along. Unless of course money can be made in which case its a great idea.
Well Happy Nuke Year to you as well!
Not many noticed it but a few days ago in South America probably something notable occurred with respect to politics, climate and energy supply:
Buenos Aires residents protest over ‘heatwave power cuts’ ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-25556136 )
Some neighbourhoods have been without power for two weeks, with a marked increase in the use of air conditioning.
I think its safe to assume it was probably not the more affluent neighborhoods.
Of course back in 2011, high of the Fuku frenzy, Greenpeace called for the closure/abandonment of Argentina’s 3 NPPs. ( http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/news/features/Worldwide-wrapup/ )
Another take on that situation, and a interesting article on the infrastructure in Buenos Aires – It appears water access was affected as well, making it particularly dangerous:
Heat Wave: Argentina Reels From Power Outage, Water Shortage, As Government Blames Electricity Distributors
In connection with surging demand, power cuts and water shortages have made life worse for many throughout Argentina, and even led to three deaths of elderly citizens. Protests broke out in the capital, demanding the government take action.
The period without electrical power and water lasted for as long as two weeks. “Without water it is unbearable,” explained a citizen quoted in Euronews. “You cannot live. Above the tenth floor, within 48 hours, it’s a death trap.” ( http://www.ibtimes.com/heat-wave-argentina-reels-power-outage-water-shortage-government-blames-electricity-distributors )
Possibility of small modular nuclear reactor system at Hanford site to be studied
Washington state’s Tri-City Development Council will solicit bids on a study to investigate the benefits of building a small modular nuclear reactor at the Hanford site. The study will examine three potential sites. The SMR would cost between $500 million and $1 billion, and the project — if it goes ahead — would create between 200 and 300 construction jobs. Tri-City Herald (Kennewick, Pasco and Richland, Wash.) (12/30)
George C forgot to include the cost of this ridiculous study: $500,000 of taxpayer sucker money for a ***STUDY***.
“TRIDEC also wants to position the Tri-Cities for a role in manufacturing or assembling commercial small nuclear reactors.”
And how is TRIDEC going to do that? By having more $500,000 studies of course. Socialist crooks, all of them.
On the subject of predicting the future, the following article looks at Isaac Asimov’s predictions of the future 50 years ago. Some are pretty good.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/02/isaac-asimov-2014_n_4530785.html
One nuclear related prediction:
“The appliances of 2014 will have no electric cords, of course, for they will be powered by long-lived batteries running on radioisotopes.”
Technically doable, but probably cost prohibitive. The potential dangers of people tearing apart RTGs is also a concern in today’s world, where nefarious people can do nefarious things.
“Possibility of small modular nuclear reactor system at Hanford site to be studied
Washington state’s Tri-City Development Council will solicit bids on a study to investigate the benefits of building a small modular nuclear reactor at the Hanford site.”
This is good. Hopefully if they build one they won’t be swamped from Seattle protestors.
“Perhaps 2014 will be the year nuclear dreamers rid themselves of stupid ideas like:
1. Seawater extraction of uranium
2. MSR’s
3. SMR’s
4. Fusion”
Never! I believe in the words of Kirk Sorensen! The LFTR is our holy grail of energy!
Give me a tall ship and a star to steer her by!
Just to add a little to your discussion about Yucca Mtn:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/03/06/utah-on-verge-passing-bill-demanding-feds-relinquish-public-land/
There’s a movement to get the federal government to turn federal lands in Utah and Arizona over to the state. I’m sure there’s similar bills pending in other state legislatures. The idea being that the federal government isn’t being a good steward of the land and is limiting economic growth in the west. While I agree that the federal government should dispose of much of it, I believe it should be homesteaded and/or sold to individuals, not just turned over to the state government.
The gaming industry is so worried about regional casino growth that they don’t want any possible excuse, no matter how unfounded, to keep people from coming to Las Vegas. Of course the overlap in the Venn diagram of casino patrons and people worried enough about Yucca mountain to stay away from Vegas is likely so thin you’d need a Retina display to notice it. And it wasn’t that long ago that the casinos were promoting bomb testing to get people to come to town: http://www.neondreamsthebook.com/uploads/6/6/9/3/6693697/2759536.jpg?669
The only possible argument that might have some validity is there are no nuclear power plants in Nevada, yet NV is going to be the repository for everyone else’s “waste.” Much like western Pennsylvania became New York’s landfill after Fresh Kills closed. I-80 in PA became a constant string of trucks hauling waste (the real stuff) from NYC and northern New Jersey to cheap land fills in the area around the Ohio river tributaries that were finally beginning to support edible fish again. Not to mention the mess that’s left when a trash truck wrecks in a snowstorm. Even though there’s no comparison to a trash hauler and a truck carrying spent nuclear fuel, some people will not ever trust in anyone’s elses’ ability to do their job properly.
But for Harry Reid, it’s a win-win. The left gets their “no nukes” agenda, the right gets their “state’s rights” agenda, and the casinos have one less thing to worry about.
I’m a little late to the program here, but I just listened to the podcast. Any chance that you could get Tom Fanning to come on the show? Sounds like that would be a very interesting and informative discussion.
Also I really enjoyed the story about the talk with Dr. Cochran. It would take hundreds of fast reactors hundreds of years to burn up all the used nuclear fuel. The difference between old environmentalists and the pro-nuclear community is when we’re both looking at the same set of facts, one person sees a problem, the other, an opportunity.
An opportunity to provide people with low carbon power for hundreds of years.