Smoking Gun Part 8 – (Gas industry firing at coal with Sierra Club assist)
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…
As regular readers know, I harbor cynical thoughts about the motivations of some anti-nuclear commentators. I honestly believe that many of them are supportive of continued market domination by coal, oil and/or gas. I even have a series of blogs with the keyword of “smoking gun” (go ahead, do a search in that little block at the top left of your Atomic Insights window) that points to places where the source is a bit more open about motivation – “smoking gun” articles on Atomic Insights are generally those where an anti-nuclear comment comes directly from someone with an admitted interest in selling more coal, oil or gas.
In all fairness, however, I need to remind myself that there are some people who sell fossil fuel that say very nice and supportive things about nuclear energy and new nuclear power plant construction. I have decided on a new key word – Kevlar Vest – to indicate a post where I point to a statement or commentary by a person with a clear interest in building markets for coal, oil, or gas who comes out in strong support of new nuclear power plant development. (It is not enough to accept the existence of current nuclear plants with a “damning by faint praise” flavor. That kind of support will not earn a Kevlar Vest.)
The first Kevlar Vest goes to Rich Kinder, chairman and CEO of Kiinder Morgan Energy Partners LLP. According to a recent Reuters article titled Kinder: CO2 policy needs natgas, nuclear focus here is what Kinder Morgan does:
Kinder Morgan owns or operates 35,000 miles of gas and oil pipelines and 170 fuel and coal terminals and is building a major gas pipeline from the Rocky Mountains to the East.
In the same Reuters article linked above he is quoted as saying:
“To think we’re going to solve this with solar and wind power is ludicrous,” Kinder, chairman and CEO of Kinder Morgan Energy Partners LP, told the Reuters Global Energy Summit.
“If you want to knock this thing,” he said of cutting fossil fuel emissions to slow global warming, “you’d go to more natural gas and you would go to more nuclear. That is far more effective.”
It is not surprising that he put his own product at the top of the list, but at least nuclear came next and he forthrightly dismissed the notion that solar and wind could solve our energy challenges.
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.
A good friend sent me a link to an interesting diary on Daily Kos titled “Clean Coal”‘s Dirty Hands?. That diary entry used an article written by Peter Montague, titled INSIGHTS: Carbon Sequestration that provides some very interesting documentation of grants provided by The Joyce Foundation to a number of mainstream environmental organizations. The essential…
A ‘smoking gun’ article is one that reveals a direct connection between a fossil fuel or alternative energy system promoter and a strongly antinuclear attitude. One of my guiding theories about energy is that a great deal of the discussion about safety, cost, and waste disposal is really a cover for a normal business activity…
It is virtually impossible to get an educational institution to understand something when its revenue depends on its audience not understanding it. – Rod Adams, Stanford’s New Natural Gas Initiative, Atomic Insights, May 30, 2015 Aside: In case the allusion doesn’t work for you, the above is deliberately structured to align with a quote from…
Arthur Scargill, former leaders of the UK’s National Union of Mineworkers, published a commentary on August 8, 2008 on Guardian.co.uk that qualifies as one of the clearest examples of a professional coal advocate trashing nuclear power for economic reasons. Here is Mr. Scargill’s view of nuclear power and his reaction when a long time critic…
An article titled Fukushima inspires safety features for Georgia nuclear reactors is a recent addition to CNN’s Powering the Planet series. It is packed full of misinformation about nuclear energy along with subtle and not so subtle promotion of natural gas, one of nuclear energy’s strongest competitors. The most important misinformation in the article is…
An article titled “US sweetens pot to study siting for spent nuke fuel storage” was published in the January 26, 2023 edition of the Washington Post. The article included a paragraph that credited “environmentalists” as being the main source of opposition to construction of consolidated interim spent fuel (CISF) storage facilities that are either licensed…