New Blogs and Bloggers, including Evan Twarog (of Vermont Yankee)

I am pleased to welcome new bloggers, and thank another blogger for welcoming a new blog. Then I welcome another new blog. Then I notice a blog I left behind by mistake. Next, I welcome a non-blog.

In other words, it's time to wrap myself in knots keeping up with the nuclear blogosphere!

Evan Twarog blogs at Atomic Insights

At the U.N.
Evan Twarog, Rotary International
President Gary C.K. Huang,
Antonio DiSilva

Let's start close to home.  Evan Twarog is now blogging at Atomic Insights.  Rod Adams of Atomic Insights welcomes Evan with a thoughtful post: Another blogger for Nuclear Energy: Evan Twarog. Evan is the son of John and Cheryl Twarog: John is a shift manager at Vermont Yankee.

Twarog has been a frequent guest blogger at Yes Vermont Yankee. He participated in rallies for the plant, testified before the Public Service Board, and wrote letters to the editor.  Twarog also worked as a summer intern at the Ethan Allen Institute in 2013. He helped with the email program, and he worked on a project model of the electric grid (along with engineer Richard Schmidt). More recently, Twarog won a prestigious competitive scholarship to Renssellear Polytechnic Institute, and won a Rotary Global essay competition. As a result of the Rotary competition, Twarog visited India and recently spoke at the United Nations.

Now Twarog will be blogging at Atomic Insights.  Welcome, Evan Twarog!

Atomic Insights Welcomes Energy Northwest Blog

Rod Adams also welcomed Energy Northwest's new blog, Northwest Clean Energy.  Since I am the lead blogger at that blog, this is another chance for me to say: Thank you, Rod!  Thanks for giving Evan Twarog a great platform, and thanks for welcoming Energy Northwest's blog.

New Blog: Nuclear Defender

I want to welcome a very new blog: Nuclear Defender.  You can't help loving a blog showing two cooling towers near a containment dome (looks kind of like a crown) with the motto: "Keep Calm and Use Nuclear."  So far, the blog has only one post:The Big Bad Becquerel. This post describes what a becquerel is, how tiny it is, and why nuclear opponents love to reference becquerels. Everything looks big...in becquerels! Nuclear Defender reviews an article about leakage at Fukushima and all those becquerels.

Sigh.  It reminds me of my early blogging days, when tritium was always described in the Vermont press in "picocuries" (a trillionth of a curie).  Picocuries, Becquerels.  Very big numbers....for very small quantities.

I look forward to more posts from Nuclear Defender.

Just Found the Blog: CASEnergy Coalition

Christine Todd Whitman

Well, I knew about CASEnergy Coalition (Clean and Safe Energy Coalition) and have used their reference material, such as Economic Benefits of Nuclear Energy.  CASEnergy is led by some pretty heavy hitters, such as Governor Christine Todd Whitman (former Governor of New Jersey and former EPA administrator). But I didn't know CASEnergy had a blog. Yes, they do.  The blog is Clean Energy Buzz, and the archives go back to January 2014.

Yeah. My face is red, especially since Yes Vermont Yankee is on the CASEnergy blog roll.  At any rate, I just added Clean Energy Buzz to my blogroll. A belated welcome to Clean Energy Buzz!

I encourage you to read their latest post, a clear and informative Halloween look at Who You Gonna Call? Nuclear Energy Mythbusters.

There Isn't Actually A Blog: Energy For Humanity

A group of environmentalists have gathered together to start a new website and group: Energy For Humanity.  The founders are Pandora's Promise director Robert Stone, environmental campaigner Kirsty Gogan, and philanthropist Daniel Aegerter. They have no corporate backing, and this group hopes to continue the network and momentum started with the documentary Pandora's Promise.

They have a great website, well worth exploring.  However, they don't have a linkable blog, or at least, I don't see one.  Still, I urge you to visit Energy for Humanity.

I love to hear all these new voices!  All are worth a visit!

Vermont Yankee Powers Down While Vermont Protestors Flock Down to New York City to Protest Climate Change

Empire State Building

In New York City

In the Brattleboro Commons, the article about the Climate March in New York is titled The last opportunity to keep the climate cool?  According to that article, 1400 Vermonters are headed to New York  for the march. They are traveling in fifteen buses (some sponsored by Ben and Jerry's) and many cars. The marchers hope to convince our leaders to do-something about the climate.

(Note: Ben and Jerry's is a major opponent of Vermont Yankee, although the company needs prodigious amounts of power to make and distribute their product.  See my post on the Ironies of Ice Cream. )

In Vermont

Meanwhile, back in Vermont, Vermont Yankee is powering down for the last time.  As this article in WWLP writes in a headline: Vermont Yankee provided about 70% of the electricity generated in Vermont.  Replacement power is sure to come from fossil sources, though ISO-NE lists "alternatives, hydro and fossil replacement."  Local businesses are already hurting, as some  Vermont Yankee employees begin to move away.





Hypocrisy Rides Again

Poster from EcoWatch

Most of these marchers are in organizations that were eager to shut down nuclear energy. Let's  think about two leaders of the march:  Harvey Wasserman and Bill McKibben.

You can see the Wasserman  poster at the right. His group has a rallying cry: "Don't Nuke the Climate!" (I have updated the poster with the much-better parody poster, below!)

McKibben and I had quite an exchange at this blog post: Carbon Dioxide and Nuclear Energy.  (Check the comments section.) McKibben founded an organization against global warming, but he has been steadily opposed to Vermont Yankee's operation.

Thank you to Urs Bolt for this image

So, why do I call it hypocrisy? Maybe they really think that nuclear energy "nukes" the climate?  If they do, they simply have refused to look into the facts. Willful ignorance is a form of hypocrisy, in my opinion.

A few facts, please

First: The UN. With a few moments worth of investigation, the anti-nuke "Climate Worriers" could find out that nuclear power creates far less greenhouse gases than almost all other forms of energy.  If you look at the Wikipedia article on life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions, you will see that the UN agency IPCC studied life-cycle emissions from many forms of energy.

According to IPCC:

• nuclear averaged 12 gCO2/kWh, 
• rooftop solar was 41 grams.
• combined cycle natural gas was 490 grams.  

Note that the IPCC is the agency that also tracks atmospheric carbon dioxide and warns us about global warming.

And yet, some people can claim the IPCC is truthful  about global warming  but dedicated liars about nuclear energy.  Well, whatever! The movie Pandora's Promise has a really good bit about this.  Comic relief! Watch the movie!

Next: Vermont Law School. But meanwhile, if people think they can't trust the IPCC, maybe they can trust Benjamin Sovacool, a leader at Vermont Law School and a dedicated foe of all nuclear energy? (Really, he's written anti-nuclear books). And Sovacool also did a life-cycle carbon dioxide footprint for various sorts of energy. I have no doubt that he did his level best to make nuclear look bad.

Sovacool's numbers are in the Wikipedia article. Sovacool calculated these life-cycle numbers:

• solar PV at 33 g CO2/kWh
• nuclear at 66 grams ("various reactor types") 
• natural gas combined cycle at 443 grams.  

Well, I guess Sovacool kind of bashed nuclear, huh?  But this doesn't  exactly show "Nuking the Climate," does it? I am sure he tried, though, gotta give him credit for trying...

It Really Rides. Hypocrisy Rides Again

According to the Vermont Agency for Natural Resources, as of a few years ago, 46% of Vermont's greenhouse gas emissions came from transportation, and 4% came from electricity generation. ( See page 22 of this pdf from the Agency.)

So what's with all these people getting into gasoline-fired vehicles and heading on down to New York City?  Aren't they GASSING the climate! Of course they are.

They are riding the climate to death!

And I suspect they feel very virtuous about it, too.

---
End note: Someone asked me  about the carbon dioxide footprint of this march. I don't know, but I welcome comments that would try to calculate it.

The German Experience: Seen by Environmentalists, and Seen by Nuclear Opponents

Communication

Triple Falls, Dupont State Forest, North Carolina
From: Farmers, City Folk and Renewable Energy
at ANS Nuclear Cafe

I consider myself a pro-nuclear communicator, and I often blog about effective communication.  However, communicating effectively means considering your audience.  I have come to the conclusion that there are two kinds of people who are opposed to nuclear energy:

• Environmentalists who have lumped nuclear with "other bad stuff," but may not have given the matter much thought. They often come to realize the role of nuclear energy in providing very low carbon electricity.
• People who are just plain against nuclear energy. Period. End of story.

You have to know who you are talking to.  For example, these two groups will have very different assessments of the recent German experience.

Environmentalists

Many environmentalists (people interested in a healthy environment) are beginning to embrace nuclear power.  The movie Pandora's Promise is about one such set of environmentalists.  Similarly, Armond Cohen, a leading environmentalist in California, noted that greenhouse gas emissions in California rose substantially when San Onofre went off-line. Cohen also realized that renewable sources, such as wind turbines, require huge amounts of land to make the same amount of power as a relatively small nuclear plant.

As described in this VPR interview, Cohen explains why he has reluctantly shifted from being an anti-nuclear activist to someone who now argues that we can't afford to dismiss nuclear power.

At the Washington Post last month, Stephen Stromberg wrote Why Environmentalists Should Hope Nuclear Power Sticks Around.  He illustrated his article with a chart showing the two low-carbon power sources in the United States: renewables and nuclear.  By 2040, U.S. renewables are expected go from producing 12% of our electricity (today) to 16% in 2040.   Nuclear energy's contributes 19% today and 16% in 2040. It is an important part of our low-carbon future.

Meanwhile, in Europe, greenhouse gas targets remain in place, but renewable targets are being scrapped.  Gail Marcus of Nuke Power Talk gives an excellent overview in her latest blog post: Good News From Europe: Reasoned Approaches to Energy Policy. 

Opponents of Nuclear Energy

At Canadian Energy Issues, Steve Aplin has several posts that show that Germany's greenhouse gas emissions have risen, despite their investment in renewables. This is because the Germans are phasing out their nuclear plants.  Two excellent posts are:

• Money for Nothing: German wind turbines and solar panels useless during coldest, darkest part of the year.
• Reducing carbon pollution from electric power generation: what works?

In the second post, Bas Gresnigt (from The Netherlands) comments that the German people are happy with the German electrical grid, because they are pleased to see nuclear be phased out.

The German Experience as an Opponent Experience

Which brings us to a question: what is the purpose of the German energy transition?  If it is about greenhouse gases, it frankly isn't working, as Steve Aplin (and others) point out.

But maybe it isn't about environmentalism, lowering the carbon footprint, or anything like that.  Maybe it is mostly about being opponents of nuclear energy. Rod Adams posted about fossil fuels versus nuclear energy: Smoking gun research continuing in earnest. This post was published in early December 2013, and now has 145 comments.

At the base of a turbine
Lempster wind farm
New Hampshire

I want to draw attention to one comment. Once again, Bas Gresnigt was commenting, and someone brought up the increased carbon plus increased electricity cost of the German experiment.  The question was

"Does the current German electricity market situation really make sense to you?"

Bas Gresnigt answered it as below (here's the link, so you don't have to read 145 comments.)
Here's his answer:

Very sensible market design.
You will agree if you measure that market with the German targets in mind (in order of importance):
1. Nuclear out
2. Democratize energy
3. 100% renewable
4. Less CO2
5. Affordable costs
etc.

I contacted Gresnigt and asked him if I could use this quote. He was kind enough to give permission, though he felt the brief statement of this quote was somewhat unfair to his arguments.  I hope he will comment on this blog post.

Back to Communication

People looking at the German experience can look at it as a colossal failure (higher carbon dioxide, higher prices) or a great success (phasing out nuclear plants). For a group for whom "anything is better than nuclear energy," no amount of communication is likely to make a difference.

For environmentalists concerned with land use and with greenhouse gases, nuclear communicators can use the German experience as an example of a situation in which, as they say: mistakes were made.

Pandora's Promise on iTunes Now

Robert Stone's Documentary, Pandora's Promise, is now available on iTunes.  It was shown in theaters all over the world, but rather a limited number of theaters-- not everyone was able to see it.  Now you can see it, own it, get some friends together to watch it!

Here's a link to Pandora's Promise on iTunes.

Pandora's Promise is about the promise of nuclear energy.  It stars active environmentalists who learned more about nuclear energy, and now support it.  A review by Cal Abel on the iTunes website includes this summary:

The people he (director Stone) chose to show in the movie didn't change their values. They changed their understanding. 

Understanding nuclear power means realizing that it is indeed the promise for an abundant world in the future.  Here's an earlier post of mine, just after I saw a screening in June. I talk about environmentalists who have their eyes open, and some who have deliberately kept their eyes completely closed.  Pandora's Promise does not expect people to suddenly be convinced that nuclear energy is wonderful, but it DOES effectively start a conversation.

Now everyone can see this movie!

Once again, the link to Pandora's Promise on iTunes!

And just for fun, once again, the trailer
.

Time to Count the Carbon: Guest Post by Donb

Pandora's Promise

Yesterday's CNN presentation of Pandora's Promise went very well, with lots of great pro-nuclear comments around the Internet.  I was particularly pleased to see so many pro-nuclear comments on the #pandoraspromise Twitter stream.

Cumberland Power Station
From Wikipedia

One of the fundamental messages of Pandora's Promise is that nuclear power can help to slow climate change.  Nuclear power is the  only abundant, reliable, low-carbon source of electricity.

Counting the Carbon

With that prologue, I go back to the guest posts I promised. There were wonderful comments on We are not Spock: Emotion and Nuclear Power. I am using some of these comments as guest posts on this blog.

Donb's comment was short and to-the-point.

Meredith-
On the day that VY shuts down, you need to start a counter on the ‘Yes VY’ website that shows the extra tons of CO2 being generated because the VY plant is not making its megawatts.

Donb
-------
Don B frequently comments on energy blogs.  He always has something relevant and cogent to say.
-----

Steve Aplin of Canadian Energy Issues has a carbon counter on his blog. Actually, he has several. Steve and I are among the few pro-nuclear bloggers that cover just one geographic area.  (Or at least, most of the time we blog about one geographical area.)

I am stealing a screen shot from Canadian Energy Issues to use on my blog. Okay, Steve?  Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery and all that?

Meanwhile, all my readers---visit Canadian Energy Issues!

Pandora's Promise on CNN Tonight--Enjoy It!

Pro-Nuclear on TV!

The pro-nuclear documentary Pandora's Promise will be shown on CNN tonight at 9 p.m. Eastern time, 8 p.m. Central time.  Plus, for the night owls, there will be encore showings on CNN, starting at 11 p.m. and 2 a.m.

Banned in Germany!

This pro-nuclear documentary is creating a lot of interest and a lot of anger.  We are lucky to be able to see it.  It's banned-in-Germany.  Okay, that is an exaggeration.   The movie is not banned, it's just that no TV station in Europe will air it.  Here's Rod Adams post on the European refusal to show it.   (Warning...video clip includes some sailor-language.)

Supported by Environmentalists!

Top climate change scientists from Carnegie Institute, Columbia University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and the University of Adelaide wrote a open letter in favor of nuclear energy.  A quote from the letter:  ...in the real world there is no credible path to climate stabilization that does not include a substantial role for nuclear power.

Lied about by the Sierra Club!

Aww...just watch the clip below in which the head of the Sierra Club talks about how the U.S. has reduced its greenhouse gas emissions--because the price of solar panels is falling fast! Puh-leeze. Robert Stone, the director of Pandora's Promise, points out that natural gas is replacing coal in the U.S.  Solar is not replacing coal.

For some reason, the Sierra Club talks about solar, not natural gas. (snark alert)

Gee, in the old days, (2007-2010), the Sierra Club quietly accepted  $26 million dollars from Chesapeake Energy, a natural gas producer. In those days,  the Sierra Club was not so reluctant to expound on the virtues of natural gas.




Available in your living room!

Watch Pandora's Promise!  Watch it tonight!


Personal Note:

I saw Pandora's Promise at Dartmouth several months ago. Robert Stone presented the movie at key universities.  It's a wonderful documentary, and Robert Stone carefully checked everything for accuracy. He had layers of review of the facts presented in the movie. Of course, this doesn't keep nuclear opponents from calling him a liar.  Sigh. But what do you expect....

Also, watch out for the "no true Scotsman" logical fallacy being applied to this movie. As in "no true environmentalist..." etc.

The Right Side of History and Pandora's Promise: Guest post by Angwin and Cravens

Emotion and Nuclear Power

Nuclear power supporters are on the right side of history.

In supporting nuclear power, we can appeal to facts, and  we can also appeal to emotion.

I am pleased to have two comments from We are not Spock: Emotion and Nuclear Power available as guest posts on this blog.

I am also happy that Pandora's Promise, a documentary favorable to nuclear energy, will be shown on CNN tomorrow night at 9 pm Eastern time.

Gwyneth Cravens:  (Comment on We are not Spock)

What a perceptive and thoughtful essay this is! And there are many reasons to feel sad about a nuclear plant closing; you do a good job of listing some of them.

One more: the shutdown of Vermont Yankee is a victory for the fossil fuel industry, which does not control its unhealthy pollutants the way the nuclear industry does.

About Cravens:

Gwyneth Cravens is one of the stars of Pandora's Promise.   She is the author of Power to Save the World, which describes her journey from protesting nuclear power to supporting nuclear power.  Cravens visited Vermont in 2011 and spoke in Montpelier and Burlington, in favor of nuclear power and Vermont Yankee (illustration is the poster from her Burlington talk).

Michael Angwin:  (Comment on We are not Spock)

Michael Angwin

John Milton wrote, ‘Truth is strong’. So, don’t abandon the facts.

But emotion has a part in this debate. We on the pro-nuclear side are entitled to draw attention to those whose lives will be affected negatively by the closure, including the employees whose jobs are lost and the wider world whose lives will be less prosperous and healthy.

Those who want to close nuclear power plants choose declining prosperity and a deterioration of our environment. We should keep saying this. We are on the right side of history.

About Angwin:

Michael Angwin is currently the Chief Executive of the Australian Uranium Association, which is now merging with the Minerals Council of Australia. On this blog, I described how Michael Angwin won a nuclear debate in 2012.  That was my first introduction to Michael Angwin, who is undoubtedly distantly related to my husband, George Angwin. Both of them have roots in the St. Just area of Cornwall.

Pandora's Promise on CNN

Tomorrow night, Pandora's Promise will appear on CNN at 9 Eastern, 8 Central time.   This documentary interviews leading environmentalists, including Gwyneth Cravens. They describe their journey to supporting nuclear energy. It's a world-wide project, including footage of Fukushima and of areas of the world with high natural background radiation.  I urge you to watch it.

Unless, of course, you are reading this blog in Europe, where the TV stations have refused to air Pandora's Promise.  Will "banned in Germany" get the kind of excited response that banned in Boston used to inspire?  Watch  the movie and decide. 

Pandora's Promise--showing that supporters of nuclear energy are true environmentalists.

Pandora's Promise: The Stars Talk to Google

My latest blog post was a guest post by Guy Page: Nuclear is Green Energy.  His article is also being published in Vermont newspapers and web sites.  In particular, Page's op-ed has appeared on Vermont Digger . On that site, it has provoked a very lively comment stream (over 30 comments at this writing).  I think readers of this blog will enjoy Willem Post's careful calculations: it is impossible to meet Vermont's energy needs with renewables.

In one comment, one nuclear opponent made a rather disgusting statement, in my opinion.  Here's the quote:

The core problem that no one seems to ever want to talk about is that there are over 7 billion (soon to be 9 billion) people on the plant all demanding more and more energy. It’s not that we have too little resources and need to produce more nuclear (or any other kind of) power. It’s that there are too many of us.

In a later comment, Guy Page asks the author of that quote to explain himself.  The author doesn't answer.

Is this man recommending genocide, or perhaps widespread famine? But maybe he doesn't want to make his recommendation too specific?  No, of course, that couldn't be what he is saying. (sarcasm alert)

The answer in Pandora's Promise

The first few minutes of this interview about Pandora's Promise refutes that man.  The promise of nuclear is the promise of an energy-rich world for all people.

Pandora's Promise is a documentary about nuclear energy.  The clip below features the stars of that documentary in an interview with Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google. They are straightforward, not snarky.  They say what they mean.

(This clip is also the Friday Matinee at ANS Nuclear Cafe today.)




See Pandora's Promise if you can possible arrange to do so.  Here's a list of theaters and cities. Also, if it amuses you, you might go on the Vermont Digger posting and add your own comment

Pandora's Promise: Nationwide now

Pandora's Promise Launches Nationwide!

Pandora's Promise is a documentary in which prominent environmentalists explain how they began to favor nuclear energy.

• The film begins its nationwide release this week. 
• Here's a link to the film website.
• Here are the places where you can see the film--in quite a few cities nationwide.  For example, Pandora's Promise will open at the Kendall Square Cinema in Boston on Friday, June 14.
• Nuclear Energy Institute has a very complete blog post, The Unofficial Guide to Pandora's Promise, with links to reviews. It also contains several film clips.
• CNN Films has acquired Pandora's Promise for cable broadcast this fall.

The official trailer is embedded below.



Reaction, Eyes Open

I was lucky enough to see the film about a month ago at Dartmouth College, with the director in attendance. The film opens people's eyes to possibilities that they had not considered.  Watching the film is not intended to be a road-to-Damascus experience about nuclear power.  Instead, the film hopes to encourage people to think about energy supplies in a new way.

For example, Terry Tempest Williams claims thirty years of antinuclear activism.  She attended the same showing that I attended, and she wrote this in The Nation:

For me, this film’s strength was not that it changed my mind, which it did not, but that it expanded it. I am interested in having an open conversation about nuclear energy. Climate change is real. We know we must wean ourselves off fossil fuels. So what are the alternatives? Are renewable energy sources enough for the energy-poor around the world?

Reaction, Eyes Closed

Not everyone was has eyes that can actually open.  Robert F. Kennedy Jr. saw the film on Tuesday of this week.  After the showing, he discussed it with the director, Robert Stone.  Well, I guess Kennedy thinks he discussed it.  It sounds to me as if he went on a rant. Apparently, Kennedy thinks that insults are very effective in convincing people.

Kennedy said the film was "an elaborate hoax" and the environmentalists in the film were "liars."    Their exchange was moderated by Andrew Revkin of the New York Times. After Kennedy had accused everyone in the film of working for (or being paid-off by)  the nuclear industry, Mr. Revkin said this to him: "You invest in solar, why should I believe you?"  Read the whole story at the NEI blog post: Robert Stone and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Clash After Screening of Pandora's Promise.

Also, an anti-nuclear organization has been printing up something called "Pandora's False Promises." I gather it is 38 pages of opinion and scare-stories. I have heard (rumor only) that they are handing out copies to people at the movie showings. Luckily, a recent Ph.D. in nuclear engineering refutes their document point by point in his blog post: Pandora's Revenge.   Thank you, Nick Touran, for this careful and well-documented rebuttal!

What you can do

Of course, go see the movie!  Write about it on your FB page, and perhaps post a review at the Internet Movie Database (or other places, such as Rotten Tomatoes).

If you go to a public venue, you might think about taking a copy of Touran's blog post with you, in case you get leafletted by the opponents.  You could hand a copy to them. Turn-about is fair play, right?

I am so glad that we now have this excellent movie available, and that many people will see it.  Robert Stone is an award-winning director, and he devoted years of his life to making this movie.  And now we all can enjoy it.

160th Carnival of Nuclear Energy Blogs: Here at Yes Vermont Yankee

Carnival carousel

Some gloom, some light

On Friday, the owners of  San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) announced that they would close the station and decommission it.  That was a very gloomy end to the week.  I had volunteered to host the Carnival of Nuclear Energy Blogs.  Was I in for a miserable experience, documenting much wailing and gnashing of teeth?

Well, no.  The SONGS closing is a huge piece of bad news, but it is far from the only news in the nuclear world.  So here we go.  Let's start with SONGS.

The SONGS closing (gloom section)

SONGS

SONGS to retire, decommission, posted by Will Davis at ANS Nuclear Café.
The latest news on the recent decision to retire the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station in California. The post includes information from a press teleconference held by Southern California Edison, and many explanatory links.

San Onofre Closing Wasn't Necessary, posted by Meredith Angwin at Yes Vermont Yankee.

I was a project manager at the Electric Power Research Institute, in the Steam Generator group.  In my post about San Onofre, I assert and explain that the closing simply wasn't necessary.  It shouldn't take the NRC more than a year to determine whether a plant can be run safely at reduced power.  My post also has explanatory links.

The rest of the nuclear world (non-gloom section)

Nuclear Uprates in the U.S., and a new reactor in China. Posted by Brian Wang of Next Big Future.

NextEra Energy has just completed 700 MW of reactor uprates at six plants.  Meanwhile, in China, a 1080 MWe PWR just began commercial operation.

New Tepco groundwater study confirms that isotopic levels are negligible Posted by Les Corrice at Hiroshima Syndrome/ Fukushima Commentary.
Japan's Press says Tepco's recent report of the actual levels of Cesium in F. Daiichi groundwater is a reversal of their previous assessment of it being negligible. To the contrary, the new assessment proves, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the cesium value in the groundwater is indeed negligible.

Carnival fireworks

Pandora's Promise--The Sundance Film Festival's Nuclear Exposé Posted by James Conca at Forbes.
Academy award-nominated director Robert Stone has premiered a new look at nuclear energy, at the Sundance Film Festival.  The film is due to open in theaters all over America the week of June 12.

Questions and Answers about Nuclear Power Posted by Jessica Lovering of the Breakthrough Institute at ANS Nuclear Café.
The Breakthrough Institute recently compiled some of the tough questions it is frequently asked about nuclear power by fellow environmentalists.  Many careful explanations of how nuclear energy helps the environment, compared to the alternatives.

Vermont Yankee Gets Permission to Install Diesel Posted by Meredith Angwin at Yes Vermont Yankee.
Sometimes "Moot" is good.  The Public Service Board (PSB) was delaying and dragging their feet about allowing Vermont Yankee to install a necessary back-up diesel. When Vermont Yankee sued the PSB in federal court, the PSB decided to give permission for the generator installation. This rendered the federal court case "moot".

Washington Internships for Students of Engineering Posted by Gail Marcus at Nuke Power Talk.
At Nuke Power Talk, Gail Marcus follows up on an earlier blog in which she discussed a technology policy internship for engineering majors from different schools across the country.  She now reports that this year, she will be serving as the faculty member in residence for the program, and she hopes to provide input from time to time during the summer on how engineering students respond to what they learn this summer about how the government handles technical issues.

-----

Sometimes you're the windshield, sometimes you're the bug.

Too often, the nuclear industry in the United States is the bug: for example, SONGs.  But even in the U.S., there is good news: Pandora's Promise is opening, new internships for engineering students, power uprates at existing plants.  And when you look abroad, the situation is even better.

Enjoy the Carnival!

152nd Carnival of Nuclear Bloggers up at Hiroshima Syndrome

Leslie Corrice has just posted the 152nd Carnival of Nuclear Energy at the Hiroshima Syndrome blog.

Why is his blog called the Hiroshima Syndrome?  Here's the explanation: The Hiroshima Syndrome is the psychological distress which may be defined as the mortal fear of nuclear energy...

Corrice then lists the three misconceptions that are the basis of this fear.  Actually, I suggest you read his essay on the subject.

And now, I have managed to get off my own subject: the 152nd Carnival itself.

It's a great Carnival.  Here's the note that Corrice sent to those of us who contributed to the Carnival.


The Carnival

This week, we are proud to have a submittal from Massachusetts Institute of Technology concerning the movie Pandora’s Promise. Other blog topics include – using risk vs. benefit as a framework for analyzing nuclear opinions, the nuclear waste storage program in the Netherlands, a former NRC chairman says he is now antinuclear, how smart-grid ads can be demeaning to women, hypocritical environmentalists, and the resurrection of FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) in the Japanese press.