Clean, Reliable Nuclear Energy [ Learn the truth... ]

[  Voices for Nuclear Energy  ]    What can get D.C. politicos and Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, environmentalists and business leaders, conservatives and liberals, national security experts and celebrities to finally agree?

[  Nuclear Energy. Reliable. Carbon-free. Available 24/7. Powering communities. Vital to our clean energy future.  ]   Nuclear energy provides nearly 20 percent of America’s electricity, all without carbon emissions. It powers and propels our way of life, protecting national security and clean air, providing millions of dollars in economic benefits and a pathway to sustainable development. That must be why it unites a vast coalition of supporters from both sides of the aisle and across the country. See what everyone is saying about America’s largest clean energy source.”

Bill Gates --- “Nuclear is ideal for dealing with climate change, because it is the only carbon-free, scalable energy source that’s available 24 hours a day.”

Secretary of Energy Rick Perry --- "If you really care about this environment that we live in — and I think the vast majority of the people in the country and the world do — then you need to be a supporter of this amazingly clean, resilient, safe, reliable source of energy."

Senator Lisa Murkowski --- "I wonder if an increased role and presence in Russia—and China particularly—will spur the U.S. to renew its efforts within the nuclear space or whether we continue to cede and take a back seat. I regret that we are losing the skilled workforce, the level of leadership that we have played, not only from a production perspective, but how we export the technologies and the smart people that come behind them.""

Peter Thiel, Technology Entrepreneur --- "If we are serious about replacing fossil fuels, we are going to need nuclear power, so the choice is stark: We can keep on merely talking about a carbon-free world, or we can go ahead and create one."

Representative Adam Kinzinger --- "We have a choice to make about the continued legacy of nuclear power. Our nation could continue to lead the world in this technology that was invented and commercialized in my home state of Illinois, or we can cede this role to Russia and China."

Robert Downey Jr. --- "Half the people that were out there saying 'No nukes' and 'Shut down the power plants' are now realizing that, some would say, nuclear is the best way to go for energy for the future. So I think it's natural to reexamine your beliefs as you age up."

Eric Holthaus, Meteorologist and Grist Contributor --- "If we were smart, we’d see nuclear power for what it is: A good bet to save the world."

Stephen Moore, The Heritage Foundation --- "The solution to keeping the world's homes and factories powered up with minimal economic disruption would be for the world to build hundreds of nuclear power plants."

Fmr. Secretary of State John Kerry --- "Given this challenge we face today, and given the progress of fourth generation nuclear: go for it. No other alternative, zero emissions."

Fmr. Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz --- "Nuclear power development is a critical factor in global security. U.S. national security is enhanced if the public and private sectors work in tandem to shape the global spread of nuclear energy consistent with energy security, safety, environmental stewardship and geopolitical stability."

Sean McGarvey, North America's Building Trades Unions --- "The nuclear industry is a leading industry that drives jobs and economic growth across America."

Dr. John Hamre, CSIS --- "America must stay in a leadership role on commercial nuclear energy. Our national security directly depends on this."

[  Back to Top  ]

Setting the Record Straight on the 3 Most Common Misconceptions Around Nuclear Energy [ ... ]

[  Until we can solve the waste issue, nuclear energy isn’t a good option.  ]   The waste issue dates back decades ago when the federal government agreed to take ownership of nuclear waste and find a solution to permanently store it. Unfortunately, the politics on how best to manage it led to a stalemate, leaving nuclear plant owners responsible for managing it at the expense of tax payers.

What’s frustrating is this issue has already been solved. Scientific research says the most viable solution is to store used fuel at a geological repository like Yucca Mountain. But to move forward with Yucca Mountain, Congress must grant funding to complete the process.

In the meantime, the nuclear industry knows exactly where its waste is, and it’s safely contained (which can’t be said for all energy sources). Nuclear plant owners store their used fuel on-site based on stringent requirements set by the government. Plus, there isn’t really much used fuel out there. Nearly seven decades of waste from using nuclear power would only cover a football field to a depth of less than 10 yards.

Ultimately, losing nuclear power—the largest source of carbon-free electricity in the United States—because of a political issue would set us back in reaching our climate goals. ---

[  Nuclear energy isn’t safe.  ]    Bill Gates, an advocate of nuclear energy, has said that the safety record of the nuclear industry is unmatched by any other energy source. And he’s right. Safety is engrained in the culture of every nuclear plant.

America’s nuclear power plants have an excellent track record and are among the safest and most secure industrial facilities in the country. And the nuclear industry has a tough, independent regulator that ensures they stay that way.

Some opponents point to Chernobyl or other events like Three Mile Island (TMI) or Fukushima as reasons to phase out nuclear. But what happened at Chernobyl simply could not happen here. That event was the product of a faulty reactor design not used in the U.S. and the failing political system of the former Soviet Union. Even the showrunner of HBO’s Chernobyl has said this.

In the cases of TMI or Fukushima, those events moved the industry toward new requirements that are integrated in today’s operations. In an era when nuclear energy plays a necessary role in lowering carbon emissions, the industry’s commitment to safe operations remains ironclad. ---

[  We don’t need nuclear. 100 percent renewable energy can meet our climate goals.  ]    A diverse group of organizations such as the UN climate body, the World Resources Institute and the Union of Concerned Scientists have all said nuclear energy is necessary if we are going to lower carbon emissions in time to protect the climate.

On top of that, nuclear energy is responsible for more than 55 percent of the country’s carbon-free electricity. Replacing that much clean power with enough renewable generation would be extremely difficult. According to a report by the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, “finding a dependable, zero-emitting, cost-effective alternative to nuclear power is challenging." ---

[  Back to Top  ]