We would like to spotlight a post from the blog “Into the Breach” about recent presentation by Jacques Besanainou, CEO of AREVA North America.

The blog’s author Kendall Miller writes:

“Reviving the nuclear power industry is key to true energy security. When France faced the problem of energy security they decided to go nuclear as fast as they could…

AREVA is making major investments in the US nuclear industry. They are building a fabrication facility for large steel components at Newport News. They are building an enrichment facility in Idaho. And they are building a Mixed-Oxide fuel plant in South Carolina. When they started doing these things they found that the pool of nuclear-qualified suppliers has dried up over the years. Now they are having vendor fairs in order to attract new vendors into the nuclear industry supply chain.

Nuclear power is CO2-free, power secure, and creates jobs, jobs, and more jobs.”

Read the post, “Jacques Besnainou at the Richland ANS” for the whole story.

This speech has been getting noticed ever since literally the moment it occurred, being tweeted and covered by various press…but the TED folks just put the video up.

Here is a key quote (with bolding being from us):

“So let’s look at this fourth factor — this is going to be a key one — and this is the amount of CO2 put out per each unit of energy. And so the question is, can you actually get that to zero? If you burn coal, no. If you burn natural gas, no. Almost every way we make electricity today, except for the emerging renewables and nuclear, puts out CO2. And so, what we’re going to have to do at a global scale, is create a new system. And so, we need energy miracles.

Now, when I use the term miracle, I don’t mean something that’s impossible. The microprocessor is a miracle. The personal computer is a miracle. The internet and it’s services are a miracle. So, the people here have participated in the creation of many miracles.”

By Jarret Adams

Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) told a packed audience Feb. 23 at conference held by The New Republic that he was working with a group of leading senators and the Obama administration on renewed push for a climate bill.

“We’re on a short track here in terms of piecing together legislation we intend to roll out,” Kerry told the conference. While he acknowledged that his optimism about the legislation was “contrary to conventional wisdom” and added that all of the approaches are on the table.
read more…

From Energy Secretary Chu’s Facebook Page:

Here’s a chart showing the International Energy Agency’s estimate of the combination of technologies that will be needed to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the United States – and put the world on a sustainable energy path.

As you’ll see, we need nuclear power as part of a comprehensive solution: investing in energy efficiency, wind, solar, geothermal, carbon capture, energy storage, electric vehicles, and more. In doing so, we are sparking a new industrial revolution that will create millions of new jobs here in the United States and lay the foundation for America’s long-term economic prosperity.

CNN has posted online two juxtaposed opinion pieces that argue nuclear energy issues.

In the first op-ed, “Nuclear Power’s Time has come,” CNN interviews author and environmentalist, Stewart Brand, on his support of nuclear energy.

Looking for a surefire way to cut greenhouse gases, Brand said the alternative to burning coal became clear: “We already had a very good supplier of …electricity. It worked like mad and was as clean as it could be — and that was nuclear.”

Brand concludes: “Look, you’re not going to cure greenhouse gases with nuclear, but curing greenhouse gases without nuclear is approximately impossible.”

In the contrasting opinion piece, Mark Z. Jacobson, a Stanford University professor, discusses why “Nuclear Power is Too Risky.”

Jacobson writes on how the planet can be powered by renewable energy sources like wind, solar, and geothermal alone, saying “If our nation wants to reduce global warming, air pollution and energy instability, we should invest only in the best energy options. Nuclear energy isn’t one of them.”

Both pieces debate the current issues concerning nuclear energy. We’ll let you compare the “nuclear argument” yourself.

Let us know what you think.

There are two items to highlight from the Washington Post today. First, here is this quote from an op ed piece we like a lot:

“The merits of nuclear power have been debated for years. Such power has drawbacks, not least the waste that reactors produce and that the government cannot decide where to store. But given that nuclear power produces essentially no carbon emissions, it’s an appealing option for consistent and relatively clean electricity generation….the president is right to signal that he will unfreeze the regulatory process, which, in concert with public discomfort, has stymied the industry for decades. And there is a reasonable argument that nuclear should get this federal push. Though nuclear may well be more cost-efficient than its critics allege, huge upfront construction costs scare off investors. If loan guarantees for the first batch of new plants help demonstrate that reactors can be built without the delays and cost overruns that have characterized some nuclear projects, capital will come to nuclear without as much governmental support in the future and without taxpayers actually spending much.”

And in a separate section of the WashPost site, blogger Ezra Klein posts this chart, explaining in part why the Administration is supporting Nuclear over other dirtier electiricity generation technologies…

By Mike McMahon

My name is Mike McMahon, and I am an American living in the south of France on an expatriate assignment at AREVA’s MELOX mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel fabrication facility in the Rhône family. My family and I moved from Bethesda, Maryland to France in July 2008 to begin a multi-year assignment learning firsthand the technologies that AREVA uses to recycle nuclear fuel for the entire French nuclear fleet and for customers in Japan and Germany as well.
read more…

Think you know a lot about clean energy? Challenge yourself and try for
the top score on AREVA’s Clean Energy Quiz.
read more…

By Jarret Adams

Right now, nuclear energy is expanding around the world. According to the World Nuclear Association, there are 50 reactors under construction across the globe and another 130 (and counting) scheduled to come online over the next decade.

The nuclear renaissance is happening.

Today the world demands clean, low-carbon energy sources to prevent further increases in carbon-dioxide emissions. That is why we are seeing increasing interest in nuclear energy as well as renewable technologies such as wind and solar.

In the United States, nuclear energy is by far the largest source of electricity that does not produce greenhouse gas emissions. In fact, 72 percent of the nation’s emissions-free electricity comes from nuclear power.

At AREVA, we believe nuclear energy must be part of any solution to reduce harmful emissions and provide affordable, clean electricity to the country. Nuclear energy is just one part of the equation, a range of clean energy sources, including renewables, are needed. But in realistic terms, the United States would be hard pressed to meet its energy and climate goals without nuclear energy.

From California to New York, companies like AREVA are planning a new generation of nuclear energy plants. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has received 17 applications to license 25 new reactors and is working hard to review them. Included among these are four AREVA U.S. EPR™ reactors. These four domestic reactors are in addition to the four EPR™ reactors AREVA has under construction worldwide.

These new nuclear facilities will do more than produce clean, reliable electricity. These projects will inject billions of dollars of investment into local communities and create thousands of high-paying jobs.

We must tackle the challenges of reducing emissions and creating a clean-energy economy. Nuclear energy is a reliable, clean-energy source, capable of generating jobs where they are needed most. New nuclear plants should be part of the nation’s energy solution.

Jarret Adams is director of media relations at AREVA Inc. in Bethesda, Md.

From today’s Wall Street Journal, an op-ed by Russian businessman, Oleg Deripaska

Russian businessman, Oleg Deripaska

“It is 50 years since the first commercial nuclear power plants began to generate electricity. Even in the dark days of the Cold War, these reactors, in France and the U.S., were seen as vital to the world’s future. They were expected to mark the beginning of a new peaceful atomic age that would help meet our energy needs.

Nuclear power now generates 15% of the world’s electricity. But a combination of alternative and plentiful energy sources, high costs, the impact of the Chernobyl disaster as well as scare campaigns has meant nuclear power has failed to live up to its pioneers’ loftiest ambitions.

Oil is, however, no longer cheap or plentiful. There are serious worries about future supplies. At the same time, demand for energy continues to accelerate to support the growth of developing economies. Climate change caused by emissions from fossil fuels poses a threat to our quality of life. It is no surprise that the balance is tipping back in favor of nuclear power.”

- Oleg Deripaska