Posts Tagged ‘Wall Street Journal’

November 7, 2011 | 10:06 am

The Dalai Lama Speaks in Japan on Nuclear Energy

While touring the tsunami-devastated portions of northeastern Japan, the Dalai Lama spoke about nuclear energy for the first time. The Wall Street Journal reports his statements this morning:

…the Dalai Lama on Monday said he is in support of using nuclear energy for peaceful means as a way to bridge the socioeconomic gap in developing countries in the absence of more efficient alternative energy sources. “There is still many developing countries with a huge gap between rich and poor…millions of people’s lives remain under the poverty level and we have to think about these people…”

…On Monday, he urged people on both sides of the contentious nuclear argument to look at the issue “holistically.” “Just to look at it from one side then to make a decision is not right,” he said. While speaking to the benefits of nuclear energy, however, he underlined the holistic lens needed to be pointed at the issue of risk as well. Nuclear energy specialists “should take maximum sorts of preparations.”

We at AREVA admire the Dalai Lama’s clarity on understanding the differences between developing nuclear weaponry and nuclear energy, and now his supportive voice for nuclear power to help developing nations. Read the entire article here.

March 15, 2011 | 1:57 pm

WSJ Poll- Is Nuclear Energy Safe?

The answer to this online poll is overwhelmingly YES based on almost 7,000 votes.
But don’t take our word for it–the comments demonstrate a real debate on the question.

December 9, 2009 | 12:01 pm

Washington Post launches Post Carbon blog

As the important climate change dialogue continues in Copenhagen and throughout the world, the Washington Post has launched Post Carbon, a blog providing up-to-the-minute information about the climate change crisis and what we’re doing to combat it. This week, unsurprisingly, they’re in Copenhagen providing live updates as the climate change conference goes on.

We’re glad to see that more and more newspapers – like the Post, the Wall Street Journal, and The New York Times – are paying attention to environmental issues, climate change, and the role nuclear energy will need to play in our CO2-free energy future. We’re confident that the more dialogue, discussion, and education we have about these issues, the clearer it’ll be that nuclear power has to be part of our energy discussion as we face down the global threat that is climate change.

September 8, 2009 | 6:50 pm

Outlook for New Nuclear Plants in the U.S.

By Katherine Berezowskyj

What’s next for nuclear reactors in the United States? Rebecca Smith of the Wall Street Journal just tackled the answer to this question.  Her recent piece, “The New Nukes,” took a look at what’s being developed for the new nuclear reactors and how they are going to “be safer, cheaper, and more efficient than current plants.”

With the majority of Americans seeing nuclear energy as a safe and effective way to battle climate change, Smith puts forward that “if there were ever a time that seemed ripe for nuclear energy in the U.S., it’s now.” Her piece took a fare look at the three key areas ─cost, safety, and waste─ where the nuclear industry has been vulnerable, but is now working to solve with development and deployment of a new generation of nuclear reactors.


Even with past accidents, the safety record of the nuclear energy industry has proved this image wrong by maintaining a rigorous safety program over the past 30 years.  This next generation currently being developed, the Generation III + reactors, “take everything that’s been learned about safe operations and do it even better.”

“Generation III plants cut down on some of that infrastructure and rely more heavily on passive systems that don’t need human intervention to keep the reactor in a safe condition—reducing the chance of an accident caused by operator error or equipment failure.”

One example discussed was AREVA’s EPR™ reactor whose safety features include upgraded active and passive safety systems and a double containment building.  Smith also pointed out that skeptical Union of Concerned Scientists have named it the “only design that is less vulnerable to a serious accident that today’s operating reactors.”

And just as safety has improved with new technology and design developments, so has the cost of new nuclear plants.  They are extending the traditional life of the plants to at least 60 years, and “the new plants are also designed to be much simpler and quicker to build, reducing financing costs by potentially hundreds of millions of dollars.”

The issues regarding what do to with the used nuclear fuel include more options than building a permanent storage facility.  One possibility Smith mentions is the Generation IV fast reactors which are “designed to burn previously used fuel.”

We would like to mention another option for capturing all of the potential energy still remaining in used fuel─ recycling.  For more than 30 years at AREVA’s La Hague facility, we have been recycling used fuel in a process that exponentially reduces the volume of waste for disposal and allows some of the material to be used again as reactor fuel.

Read the whole article for the complete picture.  And be sure to check out the comments posted by readers where the discussion on nuclear energy continues.

To find out more on AREVA’s EPR™ for the United States, check it out on our website.

June 19, 2009 | 4:26 pm

Echoes of Ohio

AREVA CEO Anne Lauvergeon speaks at the announcement ceremony in Piketon, Ohio on June 18, 2009.

AREVA CEO Anne Lauvergeon speaks at the announcement ceremony in Piketon, Ohio on June 18, 2009.

Who doesn’t like a little attention? We’re pretty flattered by the interest in the joint announcement of an alliance to develop the nation’s first Clean Energy Park as the Piketon site in Southern Ohio yesterday. Even more, we’re encouraged by the focus on nuclear energy. It’s great to see that this announcement is bringing focus to some important issues.

Rebecca Smith and Mark Peters, Wall Street Journal:

Ohio obtains more than 85% of its electricity from coal incineration, one of the highest amounts of any state. Looming federal carbon legislation could raise the cost of coal-based electricity in coming years, pushing utility companies like Duke to explore lower-carbon options.

Matthew L. Wald, from the New York Times‘s Green Inc. blog, recognizing the strong suits of the location:

Ohio officials, though, hope for a ‘clean energy park’ with a reactor and the enrichment plant. Because the old enrichment process used so much electricity, the site has strong grid connections, and cooling water is available. It is also in a region hungry for industrial development.

The Huffington Post, reprinting an AP story by Terry Kinney:

The site of a former uranium enrichment plant tucked away in the hills of southern Ohio has the necessary infrastructure for a nuclear power plant — abundant water, a power grid and bipartisan political backing.

Mark Niquette, writing for the Columbus Dispatch, on Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland’s speech:

Speaking today on a stage in front of the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion plant, [Strickland] said the project would help revitalize southern Ohio’s economy while creating a clean energy source for a state and nation facing climate change.

The Dispatch also picked up on a special note from our CEO Anne Lauvergeon:

I say, ‘Let’s get to work … and go Buckeyes.’

June 1, 2009 | 11:42 am

Quote of the Day

Good to see nuclear energy bloggers being recognized at the Wall Street Journal for their blog posts on the state of the industry:

Are Finland’s nuclear woes a cautionary tale for the rest of the industry? Don’t bet on it, say Rod Adams and Dan Yurman.