We see a sign reading "Atomkraft Bitte!" in your future real soon!
The history of the attack on nuclear is the story of LNT, linear no threshold.
If that standard applied to everything we do no human activity could occur.
There would be no lithium batteries, nor the rare earths needed for “green” tech as it all produces some negatives.
environMENTAL - Excellent article about newclear energy. I like your optimistic conclusion.
My pronuclear colleagues will testify to the fact that I rarely pass up an opportunity to mention how nuclear energy's muscular competitors have played a role in creating public fears. The Malthusians were not alone in working to discourage nuclear energy development.
Competitors in coal, oil, natural gas, wind, solar and biomass continue to work, sometimes even openly, to discourage the use of nuclear fission in order to create increased demand and higher prices for their products.
As I told Oliver Stone during my interview for his film "Nuclear Now" this isn't a conspiracy theory. It's just business.
Good timing 🙌 we just released this today (nuclear power seems to be getting a lot of love these days!)
We suggest SMRs will be a critical part of global energy mix in next few decades with the current political and investment momentum behind it.
This has been a long time coming. I figure nuclear could cover 80% of the base load with a smattering of wind/solar and natural gas for peak usages
Great piece. Ontario is bucking the trend on nuclear and we will be better off for it. Thanks!
Can you elaborate on the main suppliers for enriched uranium? Isn’t Russia controlling around 50%? A nuclear plant needs fuels and being dependent on your enemy for it doesn’t spell security....
Excellent article, environMENTAL! Please see my comments to Barry Butterfield below. These comments extend on the themes you discussed in your article. I was fortunate to have a personal connection to the late A. David Rossin, Ph.D.. I provide several relevant web links.
For amore detailed rebuttal of the perceived danger of nuclear power and radiation in general, (using scientific means) please see
This is the website of Scientists for Accurate Radiation Information, or SARI.
Many articles are available which cover the wide literature on radiation and the untenable regulation and induced radiophobia that make nuclear power so expensive.
Danielle Smith, current premier of Alberta, has made some statements regarding using small nuclear reactors as part of future power generation in Alberta as well. Maybe Alberta will be one of those islands of sanity as well.
Also see this take on Putin's Ploy :
Putin's Ploy Achieved: Final Shut Down of Germany's Nuclear Power Plants
Outstanding post. One of your best yet. Thank you. Readers are suggested to look at some of the writings of A. David Rossin regarding the Carter Administration's decision on reprocessing and TMI
Excellent article. I lived through the Ontario debacle, seeing very early drafts of the “feed in tariffs” then seeing how they more than doubled my power bill from 2009-2015 as the subsidies started to fade. This scheme was also the direct cause of killing the automotive industry in Ontario. And now I get to live through it all over again in California !
Nice touch, that 'newclear future' ending really says it all - bury the irrational nonsense and nuclear power as our primary energy source will win, hands down.
While innumerable numbers of people hold a paralyzing level of fear of radiation poisoning, selling the idea of powering the world with the most energy dense means ever discovered evades us. It truly is tragic that so few people can see how misplaced that fear really is.
Losing unit 2 at Three Mile Island was an economic blow. The unit had just been started and the core melt left it unusable. That said its brother, unit 1, operated successfully for 40 more years with the operating and maintenance staff never suffering any radioactive contamination despite the contaminated unit next door.
The same is true of Chernobyl, where unit 4 exploded and 28 people did lose their lives in fighting the fires, but the remaining 3 units continued to operate and produce electricity for 13 more years. The final unit closing was a Ukrainian political commitment after the fragmentation of the Soviet ended that totalitarian state, a state that in the words of Petr Beckmann, "...placing a greater value on saving concrete than citizens lives "as Chernobyl's nucs were graphite cored and uncontained, a disaster waiting to happen.
Fukushima Daiichi is a story of poorly sited reactors and inappropriately located secondary power generation for core cooling water pumps. No lives lost to radiation, but the evacuation due to again, a misplaced fear of radiation, was significant. To paraphrase Edward Teller, "protecting people from what scares them rather than what can harm them." Assuredly, Fukushima was a financial disaster but it was not a human disaster.
Some day, if our society really starts thinking clearly, we will harvest the bounty of inexpensive nuclear energy.
Most excellent write-up, EM. Thanks so much for making it public!
Great article - love the history lesson!
Nuclear is good. Coal is good. All unreliable energy, at gargantuan cost, points in the direction of poverty, misery, de-industrialisation, truncated lifespans, revolution and war. Free pdf of Unchain Australia (2021) at www.unchainaustralia.com