APR: your source for nuclear news and analysis since April 16, 2010

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Greenpeace: Really?

I just read the following quote in an article covering Greenpeace's attempt to get Mexico to drop plans for two new nuclear generating stations (it has only one, a two unit BWR plant at Laguna Verde):

Nuclear power is "a costly and highly dangerous option for generating electricity, and its contribution to reducing global warming is minimal," Greenpeace said.

Here is a link to this Fox News report.

Greenpeace, this is to you: Really?

-Nuclear energy has the lowest production cost of all major sources of electricity except hydroelectric for base loads. (Reference: NEI.)

-Commercial nuclear energy in the US has had one nuclear accident in its history since 1957 and no one died there. Over 33,000 people are killed each year in the United States in car or car related deaths; how could nuclear be any safer than it is?

-Nuclear energy produces no greenhouse gases. Environmental heating by process waste heat is no different than that produced by coal or oil fired steam plants. As such, nuclear energy with zero carbon emission is a major contributor to the fight against global warming since it provides continuous, solid base load power. Wind farms have to be backed up by massive fossil fuel powered installations for times such as when the wind doesn't blow. Solar farms have to be backed up by fossil fuel powered capacity for such times as when it's too dark to get good voltage. Only nuclear runs around the clock, wind or no wind, sun or no sun producing no carbon emissions and requiring no carbon polluting backup for those times when the weather or the day-night cycle don't cooperate.

We can see then that this single quote by Greenpeace really does reveal that they know nothing about the generation of power, nor the utility or efficacy of nuclear energy.

If this is the best convincing there is, Mexico will have two new nuclear generating stations underway in the not too distant future.

Click here to see a great CFE (Comision Federal de Electricidad) presentation on Laguna Verde. But brush up on your Spanish first!

6:40 PM Eastern Tuesday March 20, 2012


  1. "If this is the best convincing there is, Mexico will have two new nuclear generating stations underway in the not too distant future."

    Greenpeace has mugged its way into national and international energy policy because most politicians don't have the spine to stand up to them or counter their wild rants since the media and schools look upon them as Robin Hood underdog-darlings, so I wouldn't count the eggs before they hatched. This motley crew can still get their way -- our security and wallets be damned.

    James Greenidge
    Queens NY

  2. @Jim: All I'm saying here with this post is that their rhetoric is tired, vague, empty and worthless. It might have worked in the 70's but it sure won't work now. Moreover, the Mexican government is probably less inclined to listen to activists than they are inclined to do things to protect their energy infrastructure and grow it so that they can attract more factories and jobs.

  3. Ironically counting carbon releases in the 30 years Greenpeace has been opposing nuclear power, and by default favoring fossil fuels, they have probably assisted in more extinctions than any pro industry group out there - IMHO.

    They are dishonest in their anti nuclear claims. That is apparent by their embrace of non peer reviewed and substandard scientific material.