4 Comments

  1. These ads don’t bother me nearly as much as the fact that nuclear has no ads. The reason? No powerful economic interests stand to make money if nuclear (specifically) expands.
    They’re either powerful but do not actually care about nuclear (Exelon), or they care but are not powerful. Uranium miners, as perhaps AREVA (specifically) are the only companies I can think of who’s future growth/profits are explicitly tied to nuclear. Other vendors and A&E’s care some, but they can make money on other energy projects just as well. They’re also often just a part of much bigger companies, like GE or Westinghouse.
    We have no champion, so one would think our future looks dim. Frankly, given this, I’m surprised things are going as well for nuclear as they are. All that undeniable merit, I suppose.

  2. There is more than a grain of truth in what you say Jim. The lack of industry support has always struck me as deafening in its silence, and the odd campaign I have seen were short and unimpressive.

  3. There was an article in Energy Daily talking about the praise Congress has lavished on natural gas (especially hydraulic fracturing). It even specifically quoted Rep Ed Markey who is no friend of nuclear.
    I also second Jim’s assessment. There are no large specifically nuclear companies to trumpet nuclear’s advantages.

  4. A big difference between gas and nuclear advertising it seems are the origins of the ads. NEI for example is a group which represents a wide number of companies in nuclear, whereas these gas ads seem to be coming from companies that just drill for and sell gas. Gas sells in vast quantities every day, uranium customers come around once every 18 months for a 1/3 top off. Given the pace of nuclear is moving at a snails pace in the USA, maybe its suppliers see advertising here as a waste here when the growth is happening in Asia.
    When I see my local utility advertising it is always free of promoting any specific energy technology. Most of their ads are aimed at saving energy or how they are a good corporate citizen in your community – PR stuff.
    Advertising on a busy train reaches more eyeballs than NEI’s effort at the hockey arena. There might be 15-20 K attending at the hockey game for a few hours. The metro reaches 100’s of thousands of eyeballs. Areva had a nice PR ad with the “Funky Town” song and a lot of cute graphics to show the energy process, though it’s hard to say how many who saw that ad made the connection of what Areva does or the benefits of nuclear. It wouldn’t take much for nuclear to get out of this obscure and low key advertising approach, as we can see a simple ad on a train can be very effective.

Comments are closed.

Similar Posts

  • This season's hot nuclear careers draw young professionals to DC meeting

    I’m excited – it is time to head out for some live contact with young(er) nuclear professional. I will be covering the first-ever Young Professionals Congress, A Hitchhiker’s Guide to a Career in Nuclear in Washington, D. C. today. Maybe I will even capture some of the “dress for success” session on my iPod.

  • Man Bites Dog Syndrome is Alive and Well

    I’ll admit it. I am a wee bit jealous of the attention that Patrick Moore and his Greenspirit Strategies are getting for their pro-nuclear stance. Mr. Moore is definitely on the right track now; he and his organization recognize that abundant, emissions free, nuclear energy is a boon for mankind. They are advocating a reasonable…

  • PBMR Update – 7 April 2006

    The South African Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) remains on track to begin construction in September of 2007. According to Tom Ferreira, the project communications manager, the first plant should be operational by 2010. A large portion of the construction and component development is being contracted to local South African firms in an effort to…

  • I wonder when facts will cause Lovins to change his canned spiel?

    I have heard Amory Lovins repeat the following statement at least three separate times. I believe that I have missed a few repetitions. Nuclear costs too much and it has excessive financial risk. In no new nuclear project around the world is there a penny of private capital at risk. (Source – http://a4nr.org/news-and-events/10.22.2006-torontostar) As mentioned…

  • Slowing demand growth gives me a deja vu feeling

    One of the myths of the first Atomic Age was that safety fears following Three Mile Island halted new development. A more careful reading of history shows that the new development had already stopped well before April of 1979; the first major wave of order cancellations happened soon after the Arab Oil Embargo of 1973…