skip to main content

Natural Resources Defense Council

Switchboard

Dan Lashof's Blog

The Galileo Syndrome

The Galileo Syndrome

There is nothing I find more annoying than bad reasoning by self-appointed “heretics.”

Unfortunately this tactic often gets a lot of attention. Witness Jesse Ausubel’s “Renewable and nuclear heresies,” which claims that renewable energy sources are not green, while nuclear power is.

Ausubel reaches this conclusion by elevating energy density (watts per square meter) to the only figure of merit for energy technologies. In doing so, he –

  • ignores economies of mass production in favor of economies of scale.
  • ignores opportunities to use land for multiple purposes (e.g. roof-top solar and wind farming on farmed land).
  • treats all land use as equivalent (e.g. an acre used for a nuclear power plant is equated to an acre of switchgrass used for bioenergy).

Finally, in assessing the land use impacts of nuclear power he only counts the power plant itself, not uranium mining or waste disposal.

The notion that supporting nuclear power is heretical is bizarre to begin with given the $85 billion in subsidies the industry has received over the last 50 years and the fact that it supplies 20% of U.S. electricity today, all without a single plant having been built in a truly competitive market.

Heretic or not, Ausubel simply gets it wrong. Less flamboyant, but better reasoned analysis of the potential for renewables can be found here and the liabilities of nuclear power here.

 

Tags:
nuclear, renewableenergy, solar, wind

(bookmark or email this entry)

Comments

John WalkeJul 31 2007 05:30 AM

For further evidence that new nuclear power plants cannot be built in a truly competitive market, look no further than the words of the industry's own officials: "Michael J. Wallace, the co-chief executive of UniStar Nuclear, a partnership seeking to build nuclear reactors, and executive vice president of Constellation Energy, said: 'Without loan guarantees we will not build nuclear power plants.'”

"Industry executives insist that banks and Wall Street will not provide the money needed to build new reactors unless the loans are guaranteed in their entirety by the federal government."

"Energy Bill Aids the Expansion Plans of Atomic Power Plants," Edmund Andrews and Matthew Wald, New York Times, July 31, 2007.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/31/washington/31nuclear.html?_r=1&hp=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1185855459-qxTNCAxA+d50Qj7iikB9oQ

Lee TruittAug 7 2007 05:29 PM

The energy bill has no limits on the amount of money that can be dished out by the Department of Energy for the construction of nuclear plants.
Congress resumes on 9-4 and there is time to have input about the role that nuclear power will play in the future..... As it stands, there is unlimited funding for nuclear plant construction and the bill waits for adjustments in conference committee.

Comments are closed for this post.

We close comments on a blog post when it's clear the conversation has moved on -- click on the tags (above) or on our homepage to see if we've got fresh news and views on this post's topic.

Clean Energy Common Sense

OnEarth: NRDC's award-winning magazine

Citizen journalism from the OnEarth magazine website

Day Five of No Impact Week: Lights Out
by Solvie Karlstrom
The Not-So-Badness of Guides to Green Living
by Emily Gertz
No Impact Week Day Four: Foreign Foods
by Solvie Karlstrom

Read more

Fresh Conversation

Feeds: Stay Plugged In