The artists at PopAtomic Studios continue to provoke thoughts with imagery. The above image is available in full resolution from Fossil Fuels are Dead. Stop by to tell Suzy and her team what you think of their work!
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.
Comments are closed.
Thanks for the link. That discussion was rather educational. It certainly does sound like the NRC will have difficulty completing…
So according to the NRC if there are people with concerns, the only response is to make regulations even more…
Michael Did you get a chance to listen to the podcast? The key innovation that Zeno has compared to those…
I see what Zeno is now… They give it away on their webpage. If you look under “Team” you will…
Neat episode and neat company! It is nice to see someone *actually* pursuing cheaper RPS’s since that has been a…
One of the members of the professional anti-nuclear establishment is a group called the Nuclear Information and Research Service (NIRS). Over the years, the group has collected tens of millions of dollars in payment for their activities. One of their current campaigns is an effort to challenge the logical assertion that people who are concerned…
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…
A couple of days ago, I had an interesting conversation with an acquaintance who had recently presented his concept for right-sized reactors directly to T. Boone Pickens, one of the most prominent promoters of American “energy independence”. He shared a very interesting story about Pickens’s reaction to the several hour long presentation and following discussion….
FPL – Florida Power and Light – is the electric power utility that serves the southeast part of Florida where 4.5 million people live and where I grew up. It is also the company where my father worked as a transmission substation engineer for a bit more than 35 years. I have very fond memories…
The Nuclear Energy Institute is hosting a series of workshops in cities around the country and in certain international forums to share information with manufacturers and service suppliers about the needs of the industry. In an economy where half a million or more people lose their jobs every month, these workshops share some encouraging information…
Christopher Meisenzahl at the Amateur Economist and Curmudeon blog had an interesting post about the need for more nuclear power on his blog. I provided the following comment, which I am repeating here so that I can ensure that the words get recorded for posterity. Besides, I need to do a post and put all…
The perception of the editorial artist is conveyed. However, the view is superficial and lacks depth perception about the issues. First the consumers are not sheep and the only Elephant in the room dead or alive is the one aboard the Russian Submarine Sarov. Soon the Kazan attack sub will be fitted with even larger Elephants whilst the Us congress debates whether Elephants are real or not and how Elephants effect the vote in November.
Hydrocarbon fuels are valued in dollars whilst Atomic Elephants may simpliy smother Congress with their bulk.
Just wanted to share this response to another critic from the PopAtomic page (in short, he stated that the elephant was a symbol of the Republican party and that it’s not nice to call people sheep) because I think it is also a good counter argument to the above comment that the image is somehow “superficial”:
“Our cartoonist has developed a personal set of symbolic ideas through a series of cartoons, beginning with the idea of the
I’m sorrry Suzy, but I’m not too keen on this one, and your explanation only reinforces my perception. A cartoon image needs to be obvious in its meaning. If it needs an extended explanation to get to that meaning, then it has failed in its intent. It’s no good working with “a personal set of symbolic ideas” unless you have a wider audience which has already been made familiar with those ideas. We don’t have the luxury of signalling people in obscure code. We need our message to be obvious and accessable.
Another cartoon idea: Imagine someone who is very very thirsty walking into a shop to buy a drink. He has these choices:
Fossil fuels = liquor (coal = whisky 80% carbon, natural gas = beer)
Renewables = Snake oil
Nuclear = an energy drink bursting with energy, or a crystal clear (zero carbon) mineral water
No dude, no! You’ll have people thinking pro-nukes are a bunch of wowsers.
So, to respond to the critiques of Finrod and Michael R. Himes, one would need to create an image which is obvious, but not superficial?
http://www.rickwalton.com/folktale/50fabl46.htm
Obvious does not need to equate with superficial. Things can be obvious and yet contain initially unglimpsed depth.
Thank you Kelly! I agree with the sentiment of the story.
PopAtomic is an autonomous voice in the dialogue about energy, and that gives us a unique perceptive and value. Although our primary goal is support nuclear energy through the arts, we also have the right and duty to be critical, and to look at the complex social issues that the science world often ignores. Otherwise, we would not be serving our audience, or meeting our goals as a non-profit organization. We are much more than just an advocacy group.
@Finrod- Almost every successful cartoon series ever created has been based on “a personal set of symbolic ideas.” And almost every political cartoon is accompanied by a full length article, or some kind of text to inform the viewer of the artist’s persp
There is nothing invalid about the image just because it doesn’t simply praise nuclear energy, or because it deals with complex social issues. Political cartoons often evoke varied responses and interpretations- that is part of their purpose- controversy. And by that measure this cartoon has been wildly successful.
Sometimes I wonder if pro-nukes get their undies tied into too tight of a bunch. The “elephant is a symbol of the Republican Party” — oh no, we can’t have that! Never mind that, as a group, they are more pro-nuke than the “Donkeys” (or is that “jackasses”?). So the symbol that evinces such loathing from you is the group that actually supports your goal – to a larger degree than their political adversaries. Go figure.
Could the elephant reflect – strength, dependability, long-life span, durable, etc.?
Don’t forget, Doc, that there “jackass” got quite a kick! And it comes from behind, too, just when you’re least expecting it…
As for the cartoon, I agree with your point especially since it’s a live elephant versus a bunch of elephant bones in a barrel. So there are elephants on both sides. Fair enough. (If it was a fossil donkey in the barrel, then I’d be concerned.)