MICHAEL Angwin wins a Nuclear Debate

The Debate

Rod Adams posted yesterday about a debate in Australia: Winning a debate in Sydney--We have seen the future and it's nuclear

It's an excellent debate, and here's a direct link to the debate, on ABC TV in Australia. It's part of a Big Ideas series of debates.  Below is a wonderful ten minute video clip of Ben Heard's introductory remarks on the debate, explaining why he changed from being opposed to nuclear energy to being very much in favor of it.




However, what really caught my attention on this debate was the name of one of the debaters.  Here's a quote from Rod's post:

"The (debate) host declared that Ben Heard, Michael Angwin, and Professor Daniela Stehlik had won a resounding victory on the question of the night and that the audience now agreed that the future of energy is nuclear."

Anybody notice the part of the sentence that caught my eye? (Emphasis added by blogger, to give you a clue...)

Michael Angwin

Angwin is not a common name, and I was amazed to see an Angwin as a pro-nuclear debater in Australia. I immediately contacted Barry Brook, who holds a Chair in Climate Change at the University of Adelaide and blogs at Brave New Climate.  Since both Brook and Angwin are in Australia, and I know Brook, I hoped for an email introduction to Michael. I received one.  (Thank you, Barry!) Michael Angwin and I have now introduced ourselves to each other.

Michael Angwin is Chief Executive Officer of the Australian Uranium Association.  Australia mines and exports uranium, but only burns coal domestically. Various groups are trying to move Australia away from coal-burning.  One such organization is  Decarbonize South Australia   Here's a four-minute clip of an interview with Michael Angwin, in which he speaks of the need to listen and reassure people, as well as share the facts.  I agree.

(


The Angwins

Every Angwin I have ever met can trace his or her roots back to the mining area of St. Just, Cornwall.  Michael Angwin and my husband George Angwin can certainly trace their roots to that area.  In George's case, his "roots in Cornwall" were his grandparents who emigrated to the United States.  Michael's ancestors left Cornwall about fifty years earlier than George's grandparents did.

As I have mentioned on occasion, George's father started his working life as a miner.  He was a coal miner near Scranton, PA. (He was holding other jobs by the time George was born.)  I am a coal miner's daughter-in-law,though  that phrase doesn't have the same ring to it as some other phrases.

It's unusual for me to encounter another Angwin, and completely astounding to encounter another Angwin who is an active pro-nuclear debater!

Conspiracy theories?

I wonder when our local nuclear opponents will claim there is an international conspiracy of Angwins to promote nuclear energy?  That this conspiracy started in Cornwall and now covers the world?  Well, they probably won't say this.  It would be funny if they did, though.

Post Script: A note about Ben Heard's video clip

In the video clip at the beginning of this post, Ben Heard describes how he moved from being anti-nuclear  to being pro-nuclear.  He calls his earlier attitude a"phobia."

In my opinion, it is younger people, such as Heard, who are more likely to make this transition. Younger people "get" climate change and fossil pollution, while older people have often moved from "ban the bomb" to "shut down the plants" and they aren't moving any further.

This is just my opinion, you understand.  However, I have noticed that Facebook tells me the ages of the followers of the Save Vermont Yankee Facebook Page, and the biggest age group of followers is 25 to 34.  Contrast this with the older women who constantly get arrested at Vermont Yankee.  Okay, this is limited evidence, for sure.  But I'm a blogger. I can occasionally share an overgeneralized opinion, or why have a blog?

65th Carnival of Nuclear Energy Bloggers: Inspiration and the Bigger Picturw

The 65th Carnival of Nuclear Energy is up at NEI Nuclear Notes. The title is Turning Inspiration int Action, Not Just Nuclear, and the Bigger Pictures.

David Bradish starts the post with inspiration. Suzy Hobbs at ANS Nuclear Cafe asks how to turn inspiration into action. What can a nuclear supporter do? Her answer is: Talk about it. Don't be shy! Will Davis, at Atomic Power Review, talks about talking about it...specifically, which is more dangerous? A nuclear power plant or a gas station? Rod Adams hosted a podcast with Ben Heard and Barry Brooks of Australia, describing how people are trying to move Australia away from its dependence on coal.

Four bloggers make comparisons of nuclear and other technologies. Dr. John Bickel at Evergreen Nuclear tracks radiation releases from natural gas production (hey, it's "natural), and Steve Aplin of Canadian Energy Issues looks at the Sierra Club's pro-natural gas policies and asks the logical question: Why are they against a gas PIPELINE but in favor of replacing a nuclear plant with a gas-fired power plant? At ANS Nuclear Cafe, Dr. Ulrich Decher evaluates whether California can meet its renewable energy goals (think "intermittency"). At Yes Vermont Yankee, my slide show describes the most likely substitutions for Vermont Yankee power if the plant closes (think "fossil").

In other posts, Charles Barton defends the Molten Salt Reactor, and indeed, all nuclear power. Margaret Harding at 4 Factor Consulting looks at the economic overview of the nuclear industry. Gail Marcus of Nuke Power Talk discusses the regulatory changes that would help Japan in the future. Dan Yurman of Idaho Samizdat has two excellent posts about the progress on the Vogtle reactors: one post on financing, and another on the recently issued NRC Safety Evaluation Report for the AP1000 reactor design,

David Bradish has put together an excellent Carnival, including well-chosen quotes from many of the blogs. Come to the Carnival! New information, interesting viewpoints, no cotton candy! It's a feast for the intellect!