Renewable Energy is a global necessity!
We support Green Energy 100%. Its success
requires continual research just as any large production method of
electricity generation. It has to achieve cost competitive productivity and
Coordinating, Cooperating & Integrating - all
forms of energy generation.
• Efficient Solar
• Clean Coal •
• Clean Nuclear •
Efficient Tidal • Clean Natural Gas
“Think About It”
We cannot energize our future by demonizing our energy of the
past or demonizing our energy of the future. Thus, coordinating, cooperating
and integrating all forms of energy generation is the only way to “solve”
our growing energy needs. Most of us establish “our opinion” about topics
based on only a small percentage of the subject matter of the dialogue. In
the context of “energy”, the “players” are naturally engrossed in their
specialty, be it wind, solar, geothermal, nuclear, coal, tidal, natural gas,
Our challenge to the science and engineering community is to maximize
the cost efficiency of “energy generation” to a wholesale production cost of
4¢ to 8¢ per kilowatt hour. The only way “we” can compete with worldwide
industrial manufacturing is to reduce our energy costs at ALL levels
Knowledge of the cost effective value of energy must become a
“national initiative” in public education and through grassroots educational
foundations like USNEF. We urge you to get involved for our future and our
children's children's future. Industry cannot educate the grassroots public.
“We” have to become more accountable for our “self” knowledge of worldwide
events and direction.
In 1983, Dr. Bernard L. Cohen proposed that
uranium is effectively inexhaustible, and could therefore be
considered a renewable source of energy. For those of us today
who continue to believe this proposal, we must continue to
propose this to the ENERGY COMMUNITY!
OF NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY
Since launching the USNEF foundation in 2006 we have
slowly and methodically gathered a contact list of some
extraordinary people in nuclear technology and the related industry.
Below are names and mini-bios of some of these people who support
our mission and we consider them some of the hundreds of “founders
of nuclear technology”.
Our mission with USNEF has been challenged from day
one. Nothing has been more inspiring to our continuation than a few
personal notes of encouragement from a couple of these very old
nuclear founders. They are the reason our challenge will continue.
BERNARD L. COHEN:
1924-2012: Was Professor Emeritus of Physics at the University of
Pittsburgh. He has been a staunch opponent to the so called Linear
no-threshold model (LNT) which postulates that there is no safe threshold
for radiation exposure.
written six books, including Heart of the Atom (1967), Concepts of Nuclear
Physics (1970), Nuclear Science and Society (1974), Before It's Too Late
(1983), and The Nuclear Energy Option (1990). He has also written about 135
research papers on basic nuclear physics, about 200 scientific papers on
energy and environment (e.g. nuclear power, health effects of radiation,
radioactive waste, risks in our society), and about 60 articles in popular
magazines such as National Review, Oui, Science Digest, Catholic Digest, and
American Legion Magazine.
received the American Physical Society Tom Bonner Prize (1981) for his
nuclear physics research. He was also elected to Chairman of the A.P.S.
Division of Nuclear Physics (1974–75).For his
research on energy and environment, Cohen received the Health Physics
Society Distinguished Scientific Achievement Award, the American Nuclear
Society's Walter H. Zinn Award (1996), Public Information Award, and
Special Award. He was also elected to membership in National Academy of
Engineering, and to Chairman of the American Nuclear Society Division of
Environmental Sciences (1980–81).
In 1983, Cohen
proposed that uranium is effectively inexhaustible, and could therefore be
considered a renewable source of energy.
Cohen was scheduled as our first speaker in 2007 when his doctor declined
his travel request. We sadly removed him from our contact list after
learning of his passing.)
Dr. ERNEST TREMMEL
lives in Washington, D.C., for about eight months each year, also maintains
a part-time business, Ernest B. Tremmel Inc., through which he is a nuclear
energy consultant for a number of clients. As a result, he is a Capitol Hill
regular. “I go along with our companies' lobbyists and explain energy to the
senators and congressmen,” he says. At 94, Tremmel says there's not much
chance he'll slow down.
He graduated from Aquinas High School in LaCrosse, Wisconsin, and enrolled
at UW-Madison. From 1941 to 1973, Tremmel's career traces the history of
U.S. nuclear physics. When he graduated from college in 1941, in the midst
of The Great Depression, he was so eager to take a job that he skipped
commencement ceremonies. He worked for just two months as a draftsman for
Curtiss-Wright Corporation, a St. Louis company that built essential war
products. Then he joined the Army Corps of Engineers, first helping
supervise the construction of the $90 million St. Louis Ordinance Plant.
By then, the United States had entered World War II and Tremmel joined the
Corps of Engineers Manhattan District. He began working in Wilmington,
Delaware, as a control engineer. At the time, the corps' Wilmington office
administered contracts with the E.I. duPont de Nemours Company to construct
the Clinton Engineering Works (later the X-10 research reactor at Oak Ridge,
Tennessee) and to construct and operate a plutonium production plant in
Hanford, Washington. Tremmel directly assisted the area engineer in
establishing and organizing the Wilmington office and administering its
contracts. He also was responsible for the Wilmington office's and outside
contractors' role in the controlled materials plan and the Manhattan
In 1945, he was temporarily assigned to the office of Gen. Leslie Groves,
who directed the Army Corps of Engineers Manhattan Project (the country's
endeavor to build an atomic weapon before Germany or Japan did). The
government gave him a telephone number and didn't tell me the name or where
I would be working. When Tremmel arrived in CA, he found the Calexico
Engineering Works. Tremmel's role was to help negotiate and expedite
procurement of parts for the atomic bomb, which was being developed at a
secret facility in Los Alamos, New Mexico. “The purpose was to ship all of
the parts to Los Angeles, then at night, Navajo Freight Lines would take the
parts to Los Alamos to assemble the first atomic bomb,” he says.
Eventually, Tremmel moved to the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) to pursue
peaceful applications of nuclear energy. He worked first in the AEC Chicago
office, where he helped Argonne National Lab and other contractors obtain a
variety of reactor-related materials and supervised government contracts for
research and development in research, biology, medicine and reactor
development. He became deputy manager of the AEC Cincinnati office before
establishing and becoming manager of its Hartford, Ct., office. That office
held a contract with Pratt and Whitney Aircraft to develop a
Following a few years as special assistant to the AEC commissioner in
Washington, he spent the last 12 years of his career as director of the AEC
Office of Industrial Participation, which bolstered the commission's
participation with U.S. industrial organizations and helped to strengthen
competition in private enterprise in the atomic energy field.
Our heartfelt condolences
We mourn the loss of
Theodore Rockwell, who passed away peacefully in his home on March 31, 2013,
predeceased by his wife of close to 65 years Mary Juanita Compton Rockwell
and his eldest son Robert C. Rockwell. He is survived by his children W.
Teed Rockwell, Lawrence E. Rockwell and Juanita C. Rockwell, along with
granddaughters Cyrena Rockwell and Angela Cescati, and great-granddaughter
The family will celebrate his life at 3 p.m. on August 17, 2013, at Chevy
Chase Presbyterian Church, 1 Chevy Chase Circle, Washington, DC.
In lieu of flowers, tax deductible donations may be made to Montgomery
or given towards his documentary on the life of Admiral Rickover, made out
and sent to: Public Media Lab, 5508 Surrey Street, Chevy Chase, MD 20815,
noting "Friends of Ted Rockwell."
A link to some of our discussions with TED
excellent discussion about Ted Rockwell by Rod Adams:
ANS Nuclear Cafe
ROCKWELL: has over
60 years of experience in nuclear technology, and is a founding officer of
the engineering firm MPR Associates, Inc., and of Radiation, Science, and
Health, Inc., an international public interest group addressing the question
of radiation science and policy. During World War II, Rockwell worked at the
Manhattan atomic bomb project in Oak Ridge, Tenn. From 1949-1964 and also at
the Naval Reactors headquarters, the last 10 years as Technical Director of
Admiral Rickover's program to build the nuclear Navy and the world's first
commercial atomic power station at Shippingport, Pennsylvania.
Ted Rockwell was given Distinguished Service Medals by the Navy and by the
US Atomic Energy Commission, and the first "Lifetime Contribution Award,
henceforth known as the Rockwell Award," by the American Nuclear Society.
Rockwell holds several patents, including one listed in "a selection of 
landmark US atomic energy patents from all the patents issued to date." He
was the only non-medical member of the Advisory Group on the National
Artificial Heart Program (1966) and a member of the Advisory Council,
Princeton University Department of Chemical Engineering (1966-72). From 1965
to 1968, he served as Research Associate with the Johns Hopkins School of
Advanced International Studies (in connection with nuclear proliferation
research). Mr. Rockwell was also Chairman of the Atomic Industrial Forum's
Reactor Safety Task Force (1966-72) and Consultant to the Joint
Congressional Committee on Atomic Energy (1967).
Author/editorial projects include: The Reactor Shielding Design Manual,
author of The Rickover Effect: How One Man Made a Difference, author
of Creating the New World: Stories & Images from the Dawn of the Atomic
Age, and co-author of Arms Control Agreements: Designs for
Verification used in US-USSR talks at the White House. I co-authored
The Shippingport Pressurized Water Reactor, selected as one of the 13
official U.S. presentation volumes at the 1958 Atoms for Peace Conference at
ALAN WALTAR served
as President of the 16,000 member American Nuclear Society (ANS) during
1994-1995. He was Professor and Head, Nuclear Engineering, Texas A&M University
from 1998 to 2002. Alan served on the ANS Ethics Committee and has been a
member of the CNF Advisory Committee since the 1980s. Alan has authored
several books including Radiation and Modern Life and numerous technical
papers. He was instrumental in the formation of the World Nuclear University
Summer Institute (SI) and has served as a mentor and a member of its faculty
for several years. Alan currently serves as consultant to the Pacific
Northwest National Laboratory (Sustainable Nuclear Power Initiative), the
International Atomic Energy Agency (recent Chair of Nuclear Knowledge
Management Working Group), the U.S. Department of Energy (Independent Review
Group for the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership), and several private
nuclear firms. He holds a B.S. in electrical engineering from the University
of Washington, an M.S. in nuclear engineering from MIT, and a PhD in
engineering science from the University of California Berkeley.
Mr. VIC UOTINEN
founded the Christian Nuclear Fellowship in 1976 and has served as the
coordinator (director) of CNF activities since that time. Vic has served on
the Executive Committees of two technical divisions of the American Nuclear
Society (ANS) - the Reactor Physics Division and the Fuel Cycle and Waste
Management Division. He also served three years on the ANS Special Committee
on Ethics (which he chaired 2003-2004). During his career in the nuclear
technology field, Vic worked for Battelle Northwest, Babcock & Wilcox, and
Framatome (the predecessor of Areva), and published several journal articles
and many technical papers on topics related to reactor physics, plutonium
recycle and various other aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle. Now serving
full-time as Director of Missions at his church, Vic still serves on the ANS
Membership Committee. He earned B.S. and M.S. degrees in physics from
Worcester Polytechnic Institute, and also completed additional graduate
studies at the University of Michigan (in physics) and the University of
Washington (in nuclear engineering).
Born in 1928 in Kaunas, Lithuania, both his parents were killed by the Nazis
while his oldest brother was killed by the Communists, who preceded Hitler
in occupying his homeland.During the Nazi years, Mike was imprisoned in the
Kaunas Ghetto, and was later transferred to Camp 10 of the
Landsberg-Kaufering Outer Camps of Dachau. Many of his friends perished
there, but he was lucky to survive and be freed by U.S. troops.
In 1947, Mike immigrated to the US, and by
1948 enlisted in its Air Force for a five-year term. During that time, he
attended evening university classes, studying physics, mathematics, and
electrical engineering. In 1953, he was honorably discharged, and was hired
by General Electric in New York as an engineer developing early warning
In 1995, Mike wrote a 500-page treatise on
the danger posed by so-called greens to the US economy and existence. Titled
“Environmentalism Gone Berserk”, It was praised by Dr. Frederick
Seitz, past President of the National Academy of Sciences, and President
Emeritus of The Rockefeller University, and was well accepted by Scientists
and Engineers for Secure Energy (SE2), of which he was a member
for many years. SE2 is no longer active, but included six Nobel
Laureates in physics and one in chemistry. Founded by Professor Miro
Todorovich, a renowned physicist himself, SE2 included other
world renowned physicists, Dr. Edward Teller, and Dr. Van Allen. Together
with Dr. John Hospers, Professor Emeritus of the University of Southern
California, Mike wrote articles on energy which were published in The
Freeman, as well as The American Enterprise. The article in the
latter magazine was published in September, 2001, two weeks before 9/11.
The nuclear energy industry worldwide has been
wrongfully demonized by environmentalists, the media and ill-informed
politicians for nearly half a century. No matter how much it is erroneously
demonized to the public, it remains the safest, cleanest most economical
high volume electrical generation known to mankind. America’s continued
avoidance of nuclear power will be surpassed by China, India, Korea and
other growing countries unless citizens, bureaucrats and business wake up to
make nuclear energy a national renewable energy initiative. An industry we
once owned, we let slip away because of political and social misconceptions.
The appropriate statement is, what were we thinking?
The DOE Idaho National Laboratory
Established in 1949
the Idaho National Laboratory is known as
United States’ National Nuclear Laboratory
Following is some data on the impacts of this national laboratory on the
state of Idaho:
This data is represented by the following criteria: Goods and services
purchased within the state; number of employees, income of employees, the
tax revenue generated by the lab.
The TOTAL impact generation is more than 3.5 billion annually.
The lab boosts the Idaho personal income by 2 billion annually.
It drives more than 24,000 jobs in the state.
The lab DIRECTLY employ’s 7,000 to 8,000 people.
The secondary employment caused by the lab is about 16,000 people.
INL accounts for 6.5% of the statewide economic output.
Directly and indirectly the lab accounts for $135 million in personal
income, corporate income and sales taxes paid to Idaho. The average wage for
8,000 employees is $80,000 annually. They expend 2.5 million to colleges for
continuing education; charitable contributions of 3.3 million and employee
donated hours are valued at 10 million.
The INL facility is the largest of the multi-program national laboratories
with 890 Sq. miles of desert operations in rural eastern Idaho. INL is
managed by Battelle Energy Alliance (BEA) its primary activities are the
Advanced Test Reactor Complex and the Materials & Fuels Complex. Educational
attainment is high with employees well above state and national averages.
The high educational nature of employees correlates to a highly paid
The Yucca Mountain Repository both as a permanent storage
facility AND a potential reprocessing facility has the potential of
exceeding such an economic impact by tenfold if the FOCUS is directed to
technology diversification. We would urge the business community and
citizens of Nevada to encourage our elected representatives to establish a
non-partisan Nuclear Technology Commission to establish a safe economic
feasibility study for a nuclear Nevada
Remember how we said
that small businesses grow from big businesses, like nuclear companies? READ THIS!
on Tue, 04/24/2012
An Idaho company is building components for the next generation of
nuclear power plants that are already in construction.
Premier Technology, Inc. of Blackfoot
is constructing a key cooling components for four new power plants under
construction by Westinghouse Electric Co. for two southeast U.S. utilities.
Its success shows the Idaho National Laboratory isn't the only Idaho
institution benefiting from the resurging nuclear industry.
The Blackfoot company is building the Integrated Head Package, a complex
structure that provides cooling to key reactor components.
The package is designed to reduce the reactors’ down-time during
scheduled refueling shutdowns.
“Clean Energy is the future of our nation,” said said Doug Sayer,
President and Chairman of Premier Technology, Inc. “The power produced by
the AP1000 nuclear plant will provide safe and reliable energy that is
greenhouse gas free.“
The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved the license for two
Westinghouse reactors for the Southern Nuclear Co. in February. Earlier this
month it approved new Westinghouse Nuclear Reactors at for South Carolina
Electric and Gas.
Sayer said the integrated head package is one of the major reactor
containment components being built in the United States. Many components
come from Asia or Europe.
“It is essential that the nation reinvigorate its manufacturing base and
return the manufacturing of these type of components to the United States”
The first package is scheduled for delivery in 2013.
Read more here:
Freshman Congressman Amodei is the only
Nevada representative who believes that the Yucca Mountain Project should be
open for discussion to include research, reprocessing and minimal storage.
Science estimates that TOTAL consumption of waste fuels can be accomplished
by fourth generation reactor designs within the next 100 years.
L to R Dr. Dennis Moltz, Dick Westrup, Gary
Duarte, Congressman Amodei, Dana Allen, John Weiss
documented, many nuclear technology advancements have continued over
the past 30 years increasing safety, stability and economics. The
greatest importance is to educate our citizens on these basics of
nuclear as the most efficient carbon free energy source available to
secure our future energy needs and accomplish energy independence.
The Case for Nuclear Energy
“A 2012 Initiative”
that many of America’s economic problems are a result of “energy costs”. For
many years our nation’s establishment politics and media have demonized
nuclear power and it is time that our citizens appraise themselves of the
science and engineering of nuclear technology instead of political and media
We are advocating that
like-minded public organizations participate in this initiative by
encouraging your members to review our publication:
Public-Private Case for Yucca Mountain”
RALPH M. HALL CHAIRMAN
Staff Report on Yucca Mountain Safety
The Administration’s Impact on U.S. Nuclear Waste Management Policy
“Other than the termination of the Department’s Super Conducting,
Super Collider Project in Texas in 1998, we know of no comparable
single project termination in the Department’s recent history as
consequential as Yucca Mountain, given the importance of its
intended mission, the massive investment in real and personal
property and the development and compilation of huge quantities of
Project-related, intellectual property.”
DOE Inspector General, July 2010
costs are a critical factor of industrial manufacturing in ANY
Without new nuclear we will lose our ability to compete with
industrial manufacturing worldwide.
Designing, engineering and building a major reprocessing facility is
an absolute must!
Yucca Mountain is another prime example of bureaucratic collapse!
Technological issues such as this are NOT going to be resolved
without the involvement of the grassroots public, provided with
sufficient information to arrive at logical conclusions.
In all these years of the Yucca Project no one has been able
to disprove the science and safety of the Yucca Mountain study. This
proof positive is contained in the final DOE license application.
Pulling this process for bureaucratic rather than scientific reason
is a disservice to the American public.
Our foundation is vetted and scrutinized by every entity and
the people we contact mostly because, "we speak the TRUTH" aloud.
Our society is so engrained in the requirement of "political
correctness" that we sacrifice TRUTH and science for self-serving
bureaucracy, continuing on a path of diminishing our morality.
The knowledge "gap" between science, business, bureaucracy and
the public is widening as our systems work to "normalize and
average" intellectual independence.
One of the biggest problems with mankind is “understanding” where we
Nuclear Power Safety Record, Ted Rockwell
Japan's Nuclear Withdrawal, bad for Japan, bad for the
U.S. Bad for the world
Spencer, Research Fellow Nuclear Energy, Heritage Foundation
Nevada citizens initiate nuclear dialogue
via the State Republican Convention
Resolutions Committee and Passed by the vote of the body
Resolution # 2012-5-5-04
Energy Independence and Economic Diversification
Click here to VIEW, PRINT, SEND this letter to the
Nevada Governor, a simple grassroots initiative
Patrick Moore: From Greenpeace Dove to
Nuclear Power Phoenix
Source: George Mack of The Energy Report (9/29/11)
Go read this
OUR BLOG RESPONSE
Dove to Nuclear Power Phoenix". Dr. Patrick Moore: Articles like this are
critical to the "truthful" discussions about nuclear power. The entire
industry and its associations should make such dialogue available to the
grassroots public. They are the people whose perception of nuclear energy
has been tainted by media and politics.
*** WANTED ***
People or groups to develop USNEF Chapters in YOUR
Don't just sit there, do something contact USNEF
AREVA and Fresno Nuclear Energy Group
Sign Contract for Clean Energy Park in California
Nuclear Advocacy for the
citizens to understand Nuclear Energy
We have to work together to achieve an equal balance and fair share
of the energy market for new nuclear development.
“time” for us to promote ENERGY as a
“2012 Nuclear Energy Initiative”
check our "headline links" daily!
Our report on the
ANS Winter Meeting 2010 in Las Vegas
SQUAW VALLEY INSTITUTE, GREAT PRESENTATION ON NUCLEAR ENERGY
USNEF GOES TO SQUAW VALLEY:
We mentioned in our last newsletter
that the Squaw Valley Institute held a neutral discussion
about nuclear energy. Three of their people spent several months
putting the project together and they did a great job with the
presentation. Not only was it a great show but they also
attracted nearly 80 of their members including about 10 of us
who took the normally one hour ride to Squaw Valley to return in
a snow storm, we all made it.
Great to see larger numbers of grassroots
people learning about nuclear!
We can only “plan” our future with our
“Clean Energy Parks”
with the concepts designed to include wind, solar, biomass and
nuclear plants. These themes are beginning to populate
worldwide, China is getting shovel ready with some 19 nuclear
plants, the BEST solution for carbon free power.
we can do is "watch with interest" as the rest of the world
builds advanced nuclear power technology!
The more we communicate
the more we educate!
SEP 17th we had a booth at the
Nevada’s Center for
Entrepreneurship and Technology
Each time we attend a business show or public presentation many
people are open to learning a little about nuclear energy.
Nuclear does not get the air play that renewables get, but when
we have a chance for open discussion not all of what they
"thought" was true.
Captain John W. Weiss and Gary
At shows we distribute our print collaterals and literature from
other companies for an educational background of nuclear
technology. We have several videos provided by nuclear firms
which provide a good insight to the construction process of a
large nuclear plant.
The more we communicate
the more we educate!
VIP Headline Links
moved to their own page
These are excellent targeted links to current articles that are focused on
nuclear industry, reprocessing technology and deep geologic storage
OUR SPOTLIGHT FOR TED
ROCKWELL'S OWN PAGE
Because he believes in our
Click here to move to Ted's page
james m. hylko
our resident editorial advisor
James M. Hylko is a Nuclear Contributing Editor for
Click here to move to James's page
Former New York
Governor George Pataki
made a stop in Reno while on his nationwide
When I hit him up with
my nuclear energy and Yucca Mountain question, (as I do everyone) he
responded YES to both. AND also that he lives only 5 miles from the
Entergy Indian Point Energy Center in New York.
One of the biggest
problems the U. S. has nationwide with nuclear energy advocacy is
getting all of the advocates on the same page instead of pursuing
there own agendas and keeping their advocacy statements "politically
sanitized". That's a tough place to be when so much discussion over
the years have been half-truth's about the safety and economic
stability of nuclear power.
Director, USNEF, Governor George Pataki
Barry Goldwater, Jr. and Gary
Duarte, Director, USNEF
continue our "display" tables and booths at various events, we
recently attended a "Candidates and Constitution" forum in Reno.
yes, Mr. Goldwater supports nuclear energy development and the
Yucca Mountain Repository.
Energy Foundation offers
a "Road Tour" of our presentation,
"A Primer on Nuclear Energy" to small western towns & Nevada communities.
Jump to these
Energy Cost Comparisons
TOO MUCH FOR POWER?
kW/h Ave Bill
Solar -- Thermal
Solar - Photo Voltaic
We try to be
careful with these numbers – and provide all of the assumptions
which are key. We know for instance that the renewable folks don’t
tend to account for the cost of subsidies in their
calculations which has a huge impact on the true cost numbers.
of new plant costs indicates that estimates of busbar costs are
sensitive to more than just the overnight cost of the facility.
They are sensitive to assumptions about the debt-equity ratio of the
project, the cost of capital, capacity factors, useful life, the
scope of work included in the project cost, and other variables.
numbers were found on a “Consumer Session” set of PowerPoint
slides on the Nevada PUC website (link below). These PPT
slides cite no sources for the numbers presented, so we have no way
of determining their basis or checking their assumptions
value shown for the cost of each resource type was the high end from
a range of values presented in the original data published on a
Nevada PUC website. The coal and gas costs shown in the original
PPT slides assume a cost of carbon described only as “$6-$8 per
ton”. [In work with Cambridge Energy Research Associates and
others, the anticipated price of carbon is well above this range,
more on the order of $20 per ton or more. Moreover, CERA and
others estimate that cost per ton must rise to $50 or so to have a
substantial effect on reducing carbon emissions under most
scenarios.] The range of values presented in the Consumer Sessions
PPT file, with and without a carbon price, is shown below:
Cost w/o Carbon Charge
(Cents/kWh) Est. wholesale
Cost w/Carbon @ $6-$8/ton
Virtually no carbon emissions
6 to 6.5¢
6.6 to 7.1 TOTAL = .12¢
6.5 to 7.5¢
6.8 to 7.8¢
6 to 9¢
Virtually no carbon emissions
6.4 to 11.4 w/tax credits
Virtually no carbon emissions
7 to 11¢
Virtually no carbon emissions
11 to 21¢
Virtually no carbon emissions
1.11 w/battery backup
w/o battery backup
Virtually no carbon emissions
We note some
differences with the consumer costs presented in the table generally
applied to Nevada. According to the Department of Energy’s Energy
Information Administration, the average Nevada residential customer
consumed 986 kwh per month in 2007, not the 1250 kwh.
According to the EIA, the average residential price for
electricity in Nevada was about 11.8 cents per kwh in 2007.
work on new plant costs compares the cost of new nuclear plants to other
baseload technologies, including pulverized coal, IGCC, and combined
cycle gas turbines.
We find that
/kWh cost of nuclear
is on par with the levelized busbar costs we estimate for new nuclear
plants using an NEI Financial Model.
Utility Cost Group collects the most complete and pedigreed data on
operating plant costs. The Nuclear Committee of EUCG has labored
for years to define and implement a consistent set of cost metrics
across the operating fleet. Their metric of choice, called Total
Generating Costs, includes O&M, Administrative and General, Fuel,
and Annual Capital Improvements, but excludes “Carrying Costs”.
The Carrying Costs include return on investment, depreciation, and
decommissioning funding. The “mortgage costs” are excluded from
the EUCG’s Total Generating Cost because the cost basis of every
plant differs due to changes in ownership and changes in the structure
of the owner/operator/holding company, to say nothing of differences in
the treatment of capital costs from state to state. The other EUCG
generation committees (Fossil, Hydro) do not yet have Total Generating
Cost data to permit us to compare nuclear plant operating costs on the
same basis as fossil and hydro plants. In our review of the EUCG’s most
recent complete year’s data, from 2007, the median value of Total
Generating Cost appears to be about $25 per MWh (2.5 cents per kWh),
about what you recalled.
Link to Nevada Public
Utilities PowerPoint Slides
LETTERS TO OUR REPRESENTATIVES
our contact database!
U. S. Governors
U. S. Senators
U. S. Represenatives
The Economic Impact
of the Yucca Mountain Nuclear
Waste Repository on the Economy of Nevada
R. Keith Schwer
Center for Business and Economic Research
University of Nevada, Las Vegas
September 29, 2003
This snippet is significantly
abridged but the full text of the summary of this report is
LINKED HERE. Consideration should also be
assessed for the time frame economics from 2003 to 2010 and further.
This research summarizes the current and
expected future economic impacts of the YMP on the state of Nevada. The
findings show that YMP could provide a stable source of revenue, income,
and employment for the state.
In 2000, the YMP contributed $195.7
million to the Nevada economy and an additional $188.6 million in 2001.
The YMP was responsible for 3,650 jobs in 2000. This translates into
a real disposable income of roughly $131 million earned each year in the
state of Nevada . . . New employment linked to the project is expected to
peak during the construction phase at nearly 4,500 jobs . . .
Employment gains will average 2,000 to 2,500 above and beyond the
baseline job forecast during the transportation and operations phase. Wages,
salaries, and in-state procurement activity are expected to boost
state GSP by as much as $228 million during the peak of the construction
phase in 2006. Average annual GSP impacts over the transportation and
operations phase exceed $102 million annually, topping $127 million in many
YMP jobs will be concentrated in relatively
high-wage industries such as construction, professional services, and
engineering. As such, they can provide a steady stream of income to Nevada
residents that are largely independent of national and international
This study does not address any
potential of evaluating the possibility of locating a used nuclear fuel
reprocessing facility in Nevada to reprocess the planned waste.
A nuclear future for Nevada
Think About It!
This report is openly published for the citizens, business community and
public policy makers to assess and include nuclear in the
development of renewable energy resources.
CLICK here to jump to this page
"The Downside of Nuclear Power-by an Advocate"
The essay above discusses the Origins of the
Conflict; the Downside, including the Opponent’s 1 Case; Policies
proposed by the Opponents and Mistakes of the Advocates; an Analysis
of the Debate; and Future Paths, which are the author’s predictions.
Our Report On
American Nuclear Society Winter meeting, Reno, NV
US Nuclear Energy addresses the
Sparks Republican Women
Special Guest, Dan R. Keuter,
Vice President Planning & Innovation, Entergy Nuclear Inc.
East, West, front and back for
has simultaneously announced plans for the manufacture of
nuclear fuel with Japan's Mitsubishi as well as
reprocessing and recycling at home in France.
Areva's headquarters in Paris
with Mitsubishi builds on a memorandum of understanding signed in April
2008. It will see Areva take a 30% stake in a new company that will "be a
fully-fledged nuclear fuel supplier, integrating development, design,
manufacturing and sales of nuclear fuel."
remainder of the company would be held by: Mitsubishi Heavy Industries
(35%), Mitsubishi Materials Corporation (30%), Mitsubishi Corporation (5%).
It will be built out of the existing Mitsubishi Nuclear Fuel company, in
company is yet to be named, but statements from the firms said it would be
established in the first half of 2009, and expects Y50 billion ($550
million) in sales by 2020 in the Japanese market. It would employ around 550
people and will supply fuel for light-water reactors and high-temperature
gas-cooled models including MOX. It will offer reconversion services and
would market MHI-designed fuel assemblies outside of Japan.
and MHI also confirmed that they want to invest in a nuclear fuel
fabrication facility in the USA.
Areva has agreed a framework for the reprocessing and recycling of
Electricité de France's used nuclear fuel from 2008 to 2040. It covers
Areva's pick-up and transportation of the used fuel from EdF's 20 nuclear
power sites, its reprocessing and the separation of re-usable materials
followed by packaging and minimization of waste volumes for eventual
companies said the new framework gave them long-term visibility - especially
in the context of EdF's desire to increase volumes sent for reprocessing
from 850 to 1050 tonnes per year and the need to step up manufacture of MOX
fuel from recycled materials from 100 to 120 tonnes per year.
Our long term mission
is to mobilize citizens in Nevada and across the U.S. to drive
Government, media and our nations business community to design build
and construct new 3rd and 4 generation nuclear power reactors and
spent fuel reprocessing technology throughout America!
We are 100% supportive of
renewable energy our challenge is getting it cost comparative and we
urge renewables and green proponants to support nuclear as “part”
our entire clean energy mix!
Mountain application docketed
US Nuclear plants set records for electricity production, efficiency
and in low cost in 2007
We would like to clarify that although our focus is
nuclear energy, we are 100% supportive of all renewable and green energy
alternatives. However, the criteria is that they must be
The highly discussed
Green Energy is going to require a
meaning, society will have to accept that the development of wind, solar,
etc. will increase your electrical power costs. This is ok for the affluent
portion of our society but it will be very difficult for low-income and
fixed income people in retirement to manage their ever increasing energy
They will say, if we
build 200 solar farms, the production cost will come down and it will, but
if we build 200 new nuclear plants, those costs will come down as well and
the "production output" of nuclear energy far exceeds that any other source!
We started losing our US manufacturing
industries in the 80s due to high energy costs and that trend has been
devastating to many “industrial” products moving offshore partially as a
result of energy costs. Today, the cost of energy is a world competition not
just a US competition. Energy IS the driver of all economies worldwide, we
cannot afford to lose this competition!
Nuclear kilowatts today are sold at about .9
cents per KWH. The best German designed solar systems are “trying” to
achieve .22 cents per KWH. Pennies here but billions when they accumulate.
We need renewable sources but, we really need to “reduce” our energy
costs in order to compete with the “world” industrialization. Not only are
they out performing us with labor productivity, they are also building
nuclear power plants and it's these combinations that are making it very
difficult for US to stay competitive.
A NEW PAPER FROM DR. COHEN
Nature’s Way vs Government’s Way
Dr. Bernard L. Cohen,
University of Pittsburgh
Dr. Cohen Writes of this in
The Greenhouse Effect:
on melting of our ice caps . . . If
present trends continue . . . a reasonable estimate-middle of the
next century, 1.5 to 3'. 1 foot sea level rise would move the coast
line back 50-100' in the northeast . . . 200' in the Carolinas . . .
2-400' in California . . . 100 to 1,000' in Florida . . . several
miles in Louisiana . . . Dr. Cohen book Chap 3 Pgs 24-25 on the link
Environmental Problems With Coal, Oil & Gas.
Something to think about!
VIP Links Tab
Jump too it!
Special Page Links:
Susan Eisenhower speaks at UN on role of nuclear energy
The riff about
at Yucca Mountain, read the truth! Click-the-link!
Think About It!
for this website is to provide an “informational educational source”
about Nuclear Energy compared to other forms of “comparable volumes”
of electrical energy production. Our purpose is to present scientific
studies and logical conclusions to average Citizens, news media,
government and business representatives about the efficiency,
productivity and safety of Nuclear Energy Power Plants.
We are a
grassroots informational group to educate average citizens about the
benefits of nuclear energy and the Yucca Mountain waste repository.
Environmentalists, government regulation and the media have created a
about the safety of nuclear energy and the repository for its spent fuel.
Our mission is to bring the facts of the science to
nuclear energy is the best alternative to fossil fuels for energy needs of
the present and future. We believe nuclear energy is the best alternative
energy source to provide quality jobs in America. We believe the
project is the
to the nuclear waste by-product issue.
We believe the pursuit of nuclear energy research will
contribute to the development of many
new nuclear power generator designs
which are more efficient and
safer then their predecessors.
We believe the development of more nuclear power
plants will significantly reduce our dependency on fossil fuels, which will
improve our economy on many levels while reducing long-term energy costs and
our dependency on foreign oil.
We need to
nuclear ENERGY industry.
Nearly every industrialized country in the world including
middle east countries are building nuclear power plants because they are a
“maximum efficiency energy source”. In the early years we over reacted
to the fear of
"radiation effects, accidents, etc." of the 60-70s
THE CHERNOBYL tab).
Nuclear technologies today are
well advanced from when we
developed our first nuclear plants. We are foolish not to excel and benefit from this efficient energy
source which would have far reaching benefits of stabilizing America’s
energy requirements and independence from the oil producing nations.
YOU to become Pro-Active. Our US energy requirements exceed our
production requirements and our fossil fuels are KILLING us and they
are the largest contributors to our global “greenhouse effect”
problems. Eliminating our consumption is not an option. We are learning to
conserve and we are developing alternative sources, wind, solar, etc.
However, the fact remains, the sooner we resolve to “educate ourselves”
about NUCLEAR ENERGY and notify our state and federal
governments that we want this directive addressed, the sooner we
“will resolve” our energy needs for our children and grandchildren.
America’s energy has extremely important ramifications for YOUR
freedoms. If you share these views then we urge you to lend a hand!