3 ms·

The True Face of the Anti-Nuclear Movement

11 points by missinfo 5y ago

h2odragon 5y ago
Oil industry funded anti-nuclear efforts and groups for years. The fact that some of them now decry the oil industry doesn't necessarily mean they're enemies; the oil industry enjoys high prices more than they hate bad PR.
flerovium 5y ago
It's hard not to ignore the fact that anti-nuclear weapons rhetoric has significantly picked up steam recently.[1] After the pandemic, people seem to have more attention for low-risk high-impact possibilities. [1] See Ken Follet's Never, op-eds about disarmament, and political science research interest.
fsflover 5y ago
See also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26603464 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26603464 EU experts to say nuclear power qualifies for green investment label: document (reuters.com) 482 points by accountinhn 7 months ago | 552 comments Also: https://www.ans.org/news/article-1392/robert-anderson-antinuclear-financier/ https://www.ans.org/news/article-1392/robert-anderson-antinu....
credit_guy 5y ago
I am as pro-nuclear as they come, but I find the tone of this article a bit too inflammatory. I used to think the NRC's licensing process is so complex only because of, you know, stupid bureaucracy. But I looked into the actual documents posted for the safety evaluation of the NuScale SMR, which you can find at [1]. I am not specialist, but there are plenty of topics that do appear to me to require serious consideration. Here's an example from the final report [2] , something about "boron dilution" We are concerned especially about boron dilution in the downcomer by steam condensation from the steam generators or the vessel wall because it may provide a source of unborated coolant that can migrate to the core following a perturbation. This could lead to a rapid return to power event (reactivity insertion accident) with the possibility of core damage. Now, it probably depends on pronunciation, but to me "core damage" rhymes a little with Chernobyl. I am glad that the NRC took their time to evaluate this risk, and numerous other like that. [1] https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/smr/nuscale/ser-open-items.html https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/smr/nuscale/ser-op... [2] https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2021/ML20212L586.pdf https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2021/ML20212L586.pdf

11 points by missinfo 5y ago

Oil industry funded anti-nuclear efforts and groups for years. The fact that some of them now decry the oil industry doesn't necessarily mean they're enemies; the oil industry enjoys high prices more than they hate bad PR.

flerovium 5y ago

It's hard not to ignore the fact that anti-nuclear weapons rhetoric has significantly picked up steam recently.[1] After the pandemic, people seem to have more attention for low-risk high-impact possibilities. [1] See Ken Follet's Never, op-eds about disarmament, and political science research interest.

fsflover 5y ago

See also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26603464 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26603464 EU experts to say nuclear power qualifies for green investment label: document (reuters.com) 482 points by accountinhn 7 months ago | 552 comments Also: https://www.ans.org/news/article-1392/robert-anderson-antinuclear-financier/ https://www.ans.org/news/article-1392/robert-anderson-antinu....

credit_guy 5y ago

I am as pro-nuclear as they come, but I find the tone of this article a bit too inflammatory. I used to think the NRC's licensing process is so complex only because of, you know, stupid bureaucracy. But I looked into the actual documents posted for the safety evaluation of the NuScale SMR, which you can find at [1]. I am not specialist, but there are plenty of topics that do appear to me to require serious consideration. Here's an example from the final report [2] , something about "boron dilution" We are concerned especially about boron dilution in the downcomer by steam condensation from the steam generators or the vessel wall because it may provide a source of unborated coolant that can migrate to the core following a perturbation. This could lead to a rapid return to power event (reactivity insertion accident) with the possibility of core damage. Now, it probably depends on pronunciation, but to me "core damage" rhymes a little with Chernobyl. I am glad that the NRC took their time to evaluate this risk, and numerous other like that. [1] https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/smr/nuscale/ser-open-items.html https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/smr/nuscale/ser-op... [2] https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2021/ML20212L586.pdf https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2021/ML20212L586.pdf