MNN - Mother Nature Network - Envrionmental News
improve your world
  • WorldShares
  • State Reports
  • Idea Lab
  • Mixed Greens
  • Videos
  • Photos
  • Blogs
  • Advice
  • MNN Community
  • MNN Social
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Follow us    
  • Join
  • Log in
  • Earth Matters

    Browse All » Animals Weather Energy Politics Space Translating Uncle Sam Wilderness & Resources

  • Health

    Browse All » Allergies Fitness & Well-Being Healthy Spaces

  • Lifestyle

    Browse All » Arts & Culture Travel Natural Beauty & Fashion Recycling Responsible Living

  • GREEN TECH

    Browse All » Computers Gadgets & Electronics Research & Innovations Transportation

  • Eco-Biz & Money

    Browse All » Green Workplace Personal Finance Sustainable Business Practices

  • Food & Drink

    Browse All » Beverages Healthy Eating Recipes

  • Your Home

    Browse All » At Home Organic Farming & Gardening Remodeling & Design

  • family

    Browse All » Babies & Pregnancy Family Activities Pets Protection & Safety

MNN.COM›

MNN BLOGGERS

Karl Burkart

Top 6 nuclear energy myths exposed

Mon, Dec 01 2008 at 5:57 AM EST
 16

Photo:Klaus Leidorf
We humans have a remarkable ability to rationalize our way into (or out of) anything, and the Nuclear Industry has certainly taken this skill to its highest and most ironic conclusion — the legitimation of nuclear energy as a viable alternative to fossil fuels.
 
The industry has misappropriated the discourse around global warming by positioning nuclear as a somehow “clean” alternative to coal, one which is “carbon neutral” (not true), affordable (absolutely not true) and most unbelievable of all, “safe.”
 
So it was a relief when Al Gore cleared things up at this year's Netroots Nation. Gore, who in the past has been open (if not friendly) towards nuclear energy, laid out the major misconceptions around the feasibility of nuclear.  Additional facts provided by the Sierra Club and discussion with a top nuclear scientist, give us the true facts that have previously been buried amidst a pile of canned pro-nuclear sentiments fed to both political leaders and journalists alike.
 
Who’s behind the misinformation?  The masterfully spin-generating NEI, the Nuclear Energy Institute. After reading the April (anti-Earth Day) issue of Wired Magazine, bearing the headline “GO NUCLEAR,” it's become clear that the NEI has succeeded in infiltrating even fairly liberal bastions of media. So it was not surprising to hear Obama give it lip service in his recent address to the Global Climate Summit.  It seems the NEI has deep pockets and powerful friends.
 
The NEI, which Dr. Helen Caldicott calls the “propaganda wing” of the US nuclear industry, spends millions every year to engineer public opinion. The NEI shares the same PR firm that represents Bechtel and other war contractors.  They are notorious for ghost writing fake editorial pieces submitted to local newspapers across the country, and were even censured by the fairly conservative Council of Better Business Bureaus for their misleading advertising on nuclear energy as “carbon-free” and “clean.”  Here is their sunny, happy header:
Photo: Nuclear Energy Institute
Below are the top 6 nuclear myths and facts:
 
Myth 1. Nuclear energy can solve the global warming crisis.
Even if Nuclear were really carbon-free (which it is not, see below) in order to play a significant role against global warming, 24 new plants per year would need to be brought online safely for the next 40 years (approximately 960 new plants).  In addition, at least 10 new storage facilities the size of Yucca Mountain (see below) would have to be brought online.  This is a near impossibility given the high costs of commissioning a plant safely and the immense technological challenges associated with long-term waste storage.  Compromising current safety standards would be necessary (MIT).
 
Myth 2. Nuclear has lower CO2 emissions than fossil fuel plants.
If you go on the NEI website, you will read that a nuclear power plant produces 0 carbon emissions.  Yes at the plant, zero CO2 is emitted, but what about the construction of the plant, the sourcing of uranium, and the transportation and long-term storage of its waste?  If you factor these energy expenditures into the equation (including storage costs modestly estimated through 2070), a typical 1500 megawatt plant emits approximately 400g of CO2 per kWh, making it roughly equivalent to a natural gas plant (Oxford Research Group).
 
Myth 3. Nuclear energy is safe.
OK, lets forget that Three Mile Island and Chernobyl ever happened, and lets just pretend that we didn’t know about the enormous and apocalyptic environmental impacts of a nuclear reactor gone wrong (the 30 km “Exclusion Zone” around Chernobyl will not be habitable for a century or more).  Human error and the potential for earthquakes are a constant looming threat in the day-to-day operations of a nuclear plant.  Just last year, a reactor in Tennessee leaked 9 gallons of highly enriched liquid Uranium, which could quite easily have triggered a spontaneous unprotected nuclear reaction of unprecedented proportions.
 
Myth 4. Nuclear waste is a manageable problem.
Currently nuclear waste is stored in 126 locations across the United States, including many unsecured nuclear power plants which are now forced to temporarily contain their waste in “dry casks,” or large metal tubes that encase the highly radioactive spent fuel in a layer of inert gas.  Many of these facilities are far beyond capacity, and (way back in 1978) were promised a safe and secure storage facility by 1998.  That deadline has long come and gone as the Yucca Mountain Deep Storage Facility continues to be beset with problems.  The Yucca Mountain deadline has been extended to 2017, and optimistic estimates put the opening at 2020 after massive costs overruns and a wave of layoffs this year.  Current estimates put the total cost of the facility at $96 billion (38% more than anticipated) and that does not include $11 billion in estimated liability of the DOE, which had promised the utility companies a safe storage facility (EE & E).
 
Myth 5. Nuclear energy is affordable.
It’s an astounding feat that the Nuclear industry was somehow been able to pass the burden of waste storage onto taxpayers, considering those costs are so enormous.  But even if you do factor out these waste costs, the economics of nuclear still do not add up.  A typical plant is usually estimated at $4 billion per plant, or $30 per mWh (roughly equivalent to Coal).  Many point to Europe for examples of cost-effective nuclear implementation, but if you look at actual numbers a plant (like Finland’s new EPR) can cost up to $6.5 billion to safely bring online.  And then there are the annual desalting procedures, in which the plant continues to operate at great costs without producing energy.  It’s thus not surprising that the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) stated that US loan guarantees of nuclear power have a 50% chance of defaulting.  Banking institutions (including Credit Suisse and Goldman Sachs) have told the DOE that private capital would not be available for nuclear investment unless US taxpayers backed 100% of debt incurred.  Clearly, not a sound business proposition (via Greenpeace).
 
Myth 6. Nuclear energy won’t affect our national security.
According to an MIT study, just 1 percent of global uranium enrichment capacity can produce 200 nuclear weapons per year.  North Korea received all of its depleted uranium from commercial nuclear power plants.  It is impossible to imagine that expanded nuclear energy production would not result in the expanded proliferation of nuclear weapons. In addition, the Dept. of Homeland Security has acknowledged that nuclear power plants are themselves prime terrorist targets and that 911 architect Khalid Sheikh Mohammed had originally planned to fly a plane into a nuclear facility in New Jersey.  The Congressional Research Service has shown that current construction standards are not in any way designed to withstand an airline attack.  In recent simulations, terrorists “reached and simulated destruction of safety systems that in real attacks could have caused severe core damage, meltdown and catastrophic radioactive releases.”
The opinions expressed by MNN Bloggers and those providing comments are theirs alone, and do not reflect the opinions of MNN.com. While we have reviewed their content to make sure it complies with our Terms and Conditions, MNN is not responsible for the accuracy of any of their information.
 
WorldShares lets you earn donations for your favorite nonprofit. Earn up to 20 points now.
Learn More
Earn Points
What's this?
Email Twitter Stumble Digg ShareShare
CLOSE link:
    Next Post
Tail pipe "Blade" adds 3.8 MPG
Related Links

Comments

Follow this conversation
Add your comment
View:
  • All (16)

anonymous
Tim 06/18/2011 01:31 AM

You use Three Mile Island as an example of why nuclear power is not safe? You know how many died at TMI? NONE! MF NONE! GOOSE_FREAKING_EGG!!! Holy crap the author of this article is an idiot.

  • Like This  
  • |
  • Reply
  • report this post 

anonymous
fireofenergy 02/23/2011 15:08 PM

1, It is true and no, we don't need any Yucca Mountain storage!
2, CO2 emissions is obviously minimal, even with inefficient LWR
3, Depends on which of the thousands of different reactor designs
4, True!, (but not with today's LRW's)!
5, Any concentrated source of power will obviously be so (like duh).
6, Again depends on reactor design. Traditionally, provided NS...

7, Only 100's of 1,000's of sq miles of solar AND storage could compete.
8, No other.... More

  • Like This  
  • |
  • Reply
  • report this post 

anonymous
Guitarsandmore760 03/20/2011 18:29 PM

Sunshine is delivered to your doorstep and your rooftop every day for FREE all over the world. There is no trucking, no mining, no black lung, no oil spills, no sea voyages and no sending money to foreign countries that sponsor international terroism.

The sun is likely to shine another 6 billion years while coal, oil, and yes even uranium have a limited supply.

If the existing architecture is used as in homes, buildings, factories, universities, business, military structures,.... More

  • Like This  
  • |
  • Reply
  • report this post 

anonymous
Roy Fileger 04/15/2010 14:11 PM

The title of your "Myth 1" contains its oen myth: That there is a global warming crisis. Anyone with an open mind and an eight grade education can easily determine that thr"Global Warming Crisis" is a hoax. It is a political issue and not a scientific issue. The "waste" issue has been grossly exagerated since Three Mile Island.

"Myth 3" is a fable intended to scare little children. Three Mile Island and Chernobyl should not be used in the same sentence. They were vastly different tpye.... More

  • Like This  
  • |
  • Reply
  • report this post 

anonymous
fireofenergy 02/23/2011 15:11 PM

GW is true because CO2 is an infrared absorber. It will heat up the lower atmosphere to a certain and higher level, thus causing more snowstorms, hurricanes, etc. When "we finish off the ice caps" then, there will be no more snowstorms.

  • Like This  
  • |
  • Reply
  • report this post 

anonymous
Nadia25Brewer 03/18/2010 19:16 PM

Have no a lot of money to buy a building? You not have to worry, because this is possible to get the mortgage loans to work out all the problems. Thus get a bank loan to buy all you want.

  • Like This  
  • |
  • Reply
  • report this post 

anonymous
alex555 02/15/2010 01:15 AM

As for myself, I don't feel waste is really unmanageable. I don't think it does cost us a lot to just let the waste sit here in dry cask storage. $138 millions per reactor isnt that much for "perpetual" storage (i.e. 100 years) (triplew.state.nv.us/nucwaste/news2007/pdf/nv070208pr.pdf). I think they make around $1 million per day for generating electricity. I disagree with the "cost" problem, we can wait 100 years, it is economically sound.

As with the environnemental problem, I think.... More

  • Like This  
  • |
  • Reply
  • report this post 

anonymous
Anonymous 09/01/2009 11:03 AM

This article is so hilariously biased, it should not be viewed as anything other than biased crap.

Clean energy? Where do you get all the parts to manufacture windmills, solar panels? What types of harmful chemicals are used to make these devices? Who is mining for the rare earths that go into these devices?

Did you know that 3 mile island released the equivalent of something like 10 x-rays? In the 70s? And how about comparing the current situation to soviet Russia? That is.... More

  • Like This  
  • |
  • Reply
  • report this post 

anonymous
Sally 08/29/2009 19:56 PM

Not useful?? Well I agree it is not useful if your goal is to prevent people from gaining important and under-reported facts about nuclear energy. One day nuclear will be an important part of the equation, but that day is probably about 10 years out, when scientists have perfected a way to make nuclear waste safe and affordable. Right not it is neither.

  • Like This  
  • |
  • Reply
  • report this post 

anonymous
David 08/29/2009 18:54 PM

Any sound energy policy should include nuclear energy. I'm not sure a post from MNN can denounce claims from people because they're biased...

  • Like This  
  • |
  • Reply
  • report this post 

anonymous
Guest 01/05/2009 21:18 PM


  • Prescription for the Planet: The Painless Remedy for Our Energy & Environmental Crises


  • Power to Save the World: The Truth About Nuclear Energy


  • Nuclear Energy Now: Why the Time Has Come for the World's Most Misunderstood Energy Source


  • Terrestrial Energy: How Nuclear Energy Will Lead the Green Revolution and End America's Energy Odyssey


  • Nuclear Energy in the 21st Century

    More

  • Like This  
  • |
  • Reply
  • report this post 

anonymous
Guest 01/05/2009 23:04 PM

I'm familiar with some of these books, and they certainly range in quality. I'm very much look forward to interviewing one of the top scientists working on "clean" nuclear technologies. I want to state for the record, I'm not opposed to nuclear energy in theory. It is quite likely in 100 years we will be powering our entire civilization using some form of nuclear energy. I just don't think we're even close as a society to being able to implement it safely.

I have two other.... More

  • Like This  
  • |
  • Reply
  • report this post 

altonwhite
altonwhite 12/16/2008 10:54 AM

Al Gore tells you what is on his agenda, nothing but half truths. Sure, the earth is warming, it has been for some time. The earth's temperature has fluctuated up and down throughout history. Have a look at this article from the NY post.
.... More

  • Like This  
  • |
  • Reply
  • report this post 

anonymous
Guest 12/16/2008 19:01 PM

I understand lots of people don't like Al Gore, but this is not about Al Gore. Here's the real question. Even if over 5,000 of the most preeminent scientists in the world are all wrong, and humans are NOT causing global warming, why are you opposed to slowing down global warming? What is wrong with making the US more energy independent, creating green jobs, and cleaning up our air? How is that a bad thing?

Its really about taking action versus doing nothing. So the question is do.... More

  • Like This  
  • |
  • Reply
  • report this post 

anonymous
Guest 12/04/2008 15:56 PM

Thank you for opening my eyes to the problems that are associated with Nuclear energy. I was being brain-washed by all the green-friendly talk...but still something inside me knew that "safe nukes" was an oxymoron.

  • Like This  
  • |
  • Reply
  • report this post 

anonymous
Ken Steel 12/06/2009 11:54 AM

"Moron" being the operative word here. The underlying premise to all of these fallacious and outdated arguments is that big energy and the government are just ignorant and possibly evil and that there is some sinister motive for pushing nuclear energy. There are real people…with families…designing and building these nuclear facilities and they are more concerned about their safety than most of the general public can imagine. The new reactor designs are safe and efficient and that is why.... More

  • Like This  
  • |
  • Reply
  • report this post 

Add your comment

Sign in with one of these accounts or just add your comment below.
    Log in or
    create an account
     
    Login
Used only for emailed comments and will not be displayed with your post
Notify me with an email when other people comment on this article.
The posting of advertisement, profanity or personal attacks is prohibited.
Click here to review our Terms of Use
Earn 100 points for signing up for a free iMeet trial now.
JOIN NOW
Sponsored by

ADVERTISEMENT

TOP MEMBERSJoin Now
  • poland.jr
    21017 points
  • ecomainegirl
    9320 points
  • achase
    9299 points
  • LauraB
    5049 points
  • Momof2
    4479 points
All members

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

CONNECT WITH MNN

Follow @twitterapi
 Tumblr
 Google +
FROM OUR SPONSOR
PGi: Better for your business, better for the planet
#ShiftNYC Opens with a Dialogue on Social Enterprise
Trends show companies are making a shift to incorporate social good into... more >
Is there a telecommuting personality type?
Some individuals may be wired to succeed at working from home while others... more >
Know Your Travel Footprint
Try this handy carbon calculator to find out how your travel can impact the... more >
PGi Green Data Center
Cost Efficiency brings Environmental Savings more >
Victorious Green Interview with Morgan Carey
The following article describes his holistic, healing perspectives on... more >

ADVERTISEMENT

Editors' Picks

Hot weather forecasters
Forget tiger moms: It's French parents we should be emulating
Out with the Gap, in with the lettuce: Reusing empty malls
These plants could kill your cat
10 things to know about your taxes

MNN Originals

MNN Eco-GlossaryMixed Greens: Leading voices in sustainabilityThis Day in HistoryMNN pollsInfographics

 


  • Earth Matters
  • Health
  • Lifestyle
  • Green Tech
  • Eco-Biz & Money
  • Food & Drink
  • Your Home
  • Family

Quick Links

  • Welcome to MNN
  • Editors' Blog
  • About us
  • Advisory Board
  • Press
  • Sitemap
  • Privacy
  • Terms of service

MNN Tools

  • Idea Lab
  • Mixed Greens
  • Videos
  • Photos
  • Blogs
  • Advice
  • MNN Community
  • MNN Social

All About MNN

  • Newsletters
  • RSS
  • Eco-glossary
  • Widgets
  • MNN Contests
  • MNN Lists
  • MNN Mobile
  • Contact Us

 


 

Copyright © 2012 MNN Holdings, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Website by GLICK INTERACTIVE | Powered by CIRRACORE
 
SPONSORS