Category Archives: Uncategorized

Uncategorized

Ontario Public Service Announcement Dec-2014

The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) will hold a two-part public hearing on the application by Bruce Power Inc. (Bruce Power) to renew, for a period of five years, its power reactor operating licence (PROL) for the Bruce Nuclear Generating Stations (NGS) A and B located in Kincardine, Ontario.

The current licence authorizes Bruce Power to operate the Bruce NGS A and B, which consists of eight nuclear reactors and their associated equipment, designed to produce electrical power.

~Hearing Part 1: February 5, 2015~

Place: CNSC Public Hearing Room, 14th floor, 280 Slater Street, Ottawa, Ontario

Time: as set by the agenda published prior to the hearing date

~Hearing Part 2: April 14, 15 and 16, 2015~

Place: The Royal Canadian Legion, 219 Lambton Street, Kincardine, Ontario

Time: as set by the agenda published prior to the hearing date

The public hearing will be webcast live and then archived for a period of 90 days on the CNSC website, http://www.nuclearsafety.gc.ca.

Members of the public who have an interest or expertise in this matter or information that may be useful to the Commission are invited to comment on Bruce Power’s application on Hearing Part 2. Requests to
intervene must be filed with the Secretary of the Commission by March 16, 2015, either online – at http://www.nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/the-commission/intervention/ – or via the coordinates below. Pursuant to the
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission Rules of Procedure, the request must include the following information:

- a written submission of the comments to be presented to the Commission

- a statement setting out whether the requester wishes to intervene by way of written submission only or by way of written submission and oral presentation

- name, address and telephone number of the requester

Personal information, such as address and telephone numbers, is essential for linking the submission to its author. Please submit your personal information on a separate page to ensure its confidentiality. It
should be noted that all submissions are available to the public upon request to the Secretariat.

Bruce Power’s submission and CNSC staff’s recommendations to be considered at Hearing Part 1 will be available after January 5, 2015. These documents are not downloadable. To obtain them, a request must be made
to the Secretariat or directly from the website. Agendas, hearing transcripts and information on the hearing process are available at the CNSC website, nuclearsafety.gc.ca.

Read the notice:

http://www.nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/the-commission/pdf/2015-02-05-NoticePublicHearing-2015-H-02-BrucePower-e-edoc4583092.pdf

————————
For all the latest CNSC news, visit CNSC’s homepage at http://www.nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/
————————
Subscribe to CNSC’s YouTube channels: http://www.youtube.com/cnscccsn
————————
Follow CNSC on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/CanadianNuclearSafetyCommission
————————
If you experience any difficulties in accessing the CNSC website, please send an email to mailto:info@cnsc-ccsn.gc.ca

Uncategorized

OCI Conference was More Like a Workshop and Well Received

This past Wednesday Nov. 20th I was at the OCI (Organization of Canadian Nuclear Industries) Annual General Meeting/Conference that took place in the Ajax Conference Centre in Ajax, Ontario near Toronto. The theme was titled “Speaking up for Nuclear Power. Advocacy and Politics in the Age of New Media” I have attended four events this year and saw OCI president, Ron Oberth, at three of them. He was always friendly and involved in the proceedings and I have come to learn is a valuable asset to Ontario’s nuclear industry.

The conference topic this time around was mostly getting industry people to help improve the nuclear industry’s image. I know as a blogger myself that I have two audiences: industry professionals and bloggers but also ultimately a growing public. I often preach to the choir about how outreach is sorely lacking. This conference hopefully will get more ideas to our own community on how to do just that.

The days proceedings began with the meeting, open to members only and then, later, to anyone who was willing to pay to attend the conference that followed. It started with the four invited speakers doing their ten to fifteen minute talks and a question/answer session afterwards.

I attended as a media person and very much enjoyed the talks and discussions. The speakers/panelists were Rod Adams of Atomic Insights, Steve Aplin of Canadian Energy Issues, Andrea Jennetta of Fuel Cycle Week and Scott Luft of Cold Air Blogs and dinner speaker Sean Conway who spoke about “The Politics of Energy”

Rod Adams spoke about the role of Social media in context with general media but also how he learned some lessons early in his attempt to get his nuclear reactor business going back in 1993.

Rod was blogging before the word was even coined. Back in 1990 Rod became AtomicRod on a precursor of the internet called Usenet. His career began as a Navy submarine nuclear engineer. Rod spoke briefly of his later years and the challenges as a nuclear entrepreneur and that his early concepts were essentially his own atomic engines which are now called Small Modular Reactors. Rod pointed out that in the process of researching his own promotion ideas he discovered and met army and navy people involved in projects that demonstrated how times have changed and in some ways are worse now. What at one time took as few as 18 months for a complete cycle to build a reactor now takes ten years or more. He gave a 1963 Greenland research reactor as an example. It was sharing common interests and sharing story opportunities that attracted his first readers. But his readers were not only local but all over the world. He discovered at meetings and industry events people came to know him as Atomic Rod.

Rod also shared some simple easy to accomplish tasks that make his blogging experience smoother.One was to read other peoples blogs and participate in the comments. Not only did he get ideas for his own blogging but gained some followers in the process.

Rod also suggested audio and video as enhancements to the reader experience. Audio in his case became a regular feature including a podcast with his own theme song. It became possible for users to subscribe and download.

Joining an email list group can also help keep you up to date and find useful and essential information that can make your blogs and reports more timely and accurate.

New bloggers on Nuclear Energy can join a community of nuclear bloggers called the Carnival of Nuclear Bloggers that posts the best blogs of the week at one of the volunteer host bloggers.

Last but not least he comments on getting active on Facebook, Twitter, Google Plus among other social media platforms.

He attributed some of his career success to his blogging. It served as a learning tool and his integrity as a blogger meant that he wanted accurate and reliable sources and often consulted with text books and industry reports which added to his knowledge but also how people viewed his credentials.

Finally Rod announced that after 20 years of mixing a day job and blogging he has become a dedicated full time communicator this past October. Rod always was prolific as a blogger but visit http://atomicinsights.com to see an even more active output.

Original thinkers like Rod continue to shape the fabric of what nuclear can become without an actual official communication infrastructure.

Next it was Canada’s own Steve Aplin who spoke about the unsung successes of Ontario’s energy mix. Steve mostly discussed how reducing CO2 as a platform for environmentalists often ignores the extraordinary role that nuclear energy has played in that specific task of providing clean energy. His recent post on Canadian Energy Issues titled “Public perception, global warming, and nuclear power: playing the trump card” comparing Germany to Ontario was the thrust of his talk.

    “Take Germany, for example. Up to a couple of years ago, nobody talked the climate talk louder than Germany. And nobody has a more embarrassing record to compare against all that talk. Germany, as I mentioned last week, gets most of its electricity by burning fuel that emits carbon dioxide (CO2), the principal man made greenhouse gas. In the course of generating electricity in 2011, Germany dumped more than 325 million tons of CO2 into the same global atmosphere that people all over the world, including in the Philippines, rely on. More than half a kilogram of CO2 came with every kilowatt-hour of electric power generated in Germany and sent into the grid. For comparison, less than 40 grams of CO2 came with every kWh of Ontario electricity”

Steve and I agree that Ontario’s success at providing nuclear energy needs to be praised and boasted about. This single important fact that Germany’s “green” image has just met with an embarrassing year with it’s high energy bills and increased “dirty green” that required “dirty” baseload power to replace the missing nuclear power they once had.

Several countries, including Germany, have responded to Fukushima by either shutting down or cancelling nuclear energy plans. The myth will be with us for a while that Fukushima can and likely will happen again. The myth is unfortunate and false and should be part of our duty to clarify how Ontario is a better energy model for preventing not just global warming and climate change but also improving the quality of life. It is hydro and nuclear that enable clean energy and keeping energy bills down can only be done by limiting how much wind and solar is part of the mix because they require the baseload that nuclear and hydro provide. Hydro growth is limited to land, water ways and topography so that leaves nuclear as the most logical clean energy source. Comparing nuclear to methane is the trump card. Yes methane is dirty. It’s not any more natural than nuclear but nuclear produces no greenhouse gases but burning natural gas produces 550 grams of CO2 per kilowatt-hour.

If the conference had been just one day later I’m sure Steve would have commented on the credit that Katherine Wynne and Al Gore tried to take for the clean energy Ontario now has. Wynne announced the banning of coal in Ontario. Bringing in Al Gore was a clever strategy as if to say we can thank these progressive thinkers for our cleaner air. Did they mention nuclear energy? No. Al Gore is anti nuclear and it appears Wynne is too. It is our job to remind people that 60 to 80 percent of our electricity has been coming from nuclear energy.

Next up was Andrea Jennetta whose comedic style brought humour and maybe more importantly a rallying spirit to the reserved bunch that usually show up at these events. Her talk started off with a loaded question. “Is there anyone here that does not believe that politics is nuclear energy’s only problem? Raise your hand.” She wanted to interject two facts about politics that never change. First, that politics is local and second, that people are stupid. I think the crowd was a little shocked at first but she was right and as my previous paragraph shows politicians will use that to their advantage. Her comment that most people equate nuclear bombs with nuclear energy and that perception has to change. Also reporters don’t care about the difference.

She pointed out that it was “Cold War guilt” that created a bunch of apologists and the self-effacing nuclear industry. She also said the nuclear industry’s biggest crime over the last 75 years was “NOT SHOWING UP”. Another little shock as she raised her voice. But as a community the industry does not participate in town halls or rally’s that fail to defend or illuminate nuclear energy in the best light. Another information “byte” was “we don’t kill anybody.” This was one of the three or four catch phrases that she repeated in her talk.

Andrea’s first suggestion was to write or speak to your local politician. In the content she said don’t lead with facts. Since people are stupid facts don’t matter. But later acknowledged that facts matter sometimes as Steve’s talk clearly reveals. Then proceeded to share how our own community helps to perpetuate the myths such as nuclear is expensive. Then she compared wind to nuclear and how wind does not project the durability, maintenance, lifetime or decommissioning in their costs. A reactor can last 80 years and is burdened with regulatory costs while wind gets a free ride. Referred to Rod Adams (@atomicrod) and Canadian Nuclear Association (@TalkNUclear) as prolific tweeter people. Andrea appealed to senior executives who need to understand the role of advocacy and politics. She also recommended empowering the employees to speak out as Rod Adams also pointed out. Perhaps an atmosphere of secrecy and expecting employees to wear blinders metaphorically is an attitude that needs changing. Company secrets can remain secrets but industry facts that paint a good picture can be shared with all. In the end she reminded us we are allowed to show our human side where ever we might “show up”.

Scott Luft spoke next as a blogger but not specifically a pro-nuclear blogger. His content is fact and statistic based and wanted to point out how rate-payers don’t know hidden costs. That is one of his areas of focus. He is also a nuclear advocate in the sense that he responds to false or misleading reports that give inaccurate information for the wrong reasons. He mentioned some fundamental lessons such as encouraging visits through comments at different blogs to read your own blogs is an important step to increase ratings and readership and in some cases the media will pick up your posts as recently happened with Steve Aplin in the Financial Post.

The decades have passed without an integrated forward thinking community. Not for lack of trying. The traditional reactors have been maintained and the few new generation reactor designs have only started to be assembled in the last few years at great expense. We should continue to produce safe reactors but also recognize when too much safety is not needed and that we can recommend changes to our regulatory system.

We need to remember that even with so-called expensive reactors (they are economical over time) their output is clean, reliable and long lasting which is reason to be proud and boastful.

Uncategorized

Nuclear Song Challenge

OK Here it is as promised. http://www.youtube.com/user/NuclearSongChallenge

Record yourself singing “Call Them Irresponsible” with the backing track. I will add it to youtube. If you are not a technology wiz with recording I recommend that you record while wearing the headphones and send me the recorded audio or video of yourself singing. I can mix your voice with the backing track. Here is the audio track without the vocals

Note the download button for these

The Lyrics are here Call Them Irresponsible Feel Free to change the lyrics on the repeated section.

I recently recorded myself singing Call Them Irresponsible here so you can see how the words fit.

Don’t worry if you don’t have video I can add a still image possibly a photo that you send me. Once I collect a few I will upload them to youtube.


I was at the Thorium Energy Alliance conference and introduced an idea to get the members involved in promoting nuclear energy. It was a great 5th conference in Chicago. Will do a more complete report soon.

Uncategorized

Is this only for the movies? “I’m Mad as Hell and I’m Not Going to Take This Anymore”

The classic film Network starring Peter Finch ( see speech here ) is a total fiction. I think it was probably 10 or 20 years too late.

The public was not ready to hear the message in the film. Now when it is just as relevant or even more so what are the chances of such an effective speech having mass effect on the public. Well we wish people cared more. I suggest that they do care but they simply feel numb and powerless to make any significant change.

But the character Howard Beal was correct. First we need to acknowledge our anger. For some of us that is like setting off a time bomb of emotions. The point here is that we will never see change for the good unless we make our feelings known. Don’t be a “passive observer.” Don’t “tune out” and hide from the pain. Be a participant. I say that is a patriotic thing to do. That defines patriotism. To be engaged in the growing as a nation. Growing as people.

That is the only way I see that real change can happen.

What we don’t realize is that many of us are on the couch too much. We are too tired after trying to make ends meet to even find time to learn about some news story that gets our attention. Should we try to get to the bottom of a story. Well my experience is that the news is not reliable, especially televised news.

I am not saying you need to sacrifice your rest time to learn about what’s going on but if you do a little work on finding your inner activist you will maybe be motivated to catch up on weekends or prioritize your time to fit the occasional quality news and learning sessions. Learning how to find truthful and accurate information is an art we should all develop.

So what do we do after we accept that we are are angry and we do care about things such as climate change and gun control. Your power is best expressed locally. Writing or phoning your local reps are both effective ways to show you care. Decisions are often motivated by getting votes. That’s how you can make a difference.

Uncategorized

Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!

Action List Contributors Nuclear Advocacy Uncategorized

Review of this years posts

  1. The recent presidential election has left a bad impression to most people. The election process needs changing so that more people can learn about the real issues and stop wasting cash for character attacks and useless ads and only letting those with money call the shots.
    One Term Amendment Needed to Flush Out the Abuse of Power Jan. 4, 2012
  2. Guest Post by Robert Gauthier (DV82XL) who has been an active critic of the way the nuclear industry and it’s advocates treat the subject of proliferation here is his post.
    Uncovering the Truth about the Threat of Nuclear Proliferation by DV82XL Jan. 18, 2012
  3. After a year of hype and propaganda regarding Fukushima an attempt to put it all in perspective.
    Fukushima Foolishness Amongst Tohoku Terror Mar. 15, 2012
  4. Taking action and making change needs props and here are some listed.
    Your Nuclear Advocate Activist Kit Apr. 10, 2012
  5. First of two excellent books published in the same year Superfuel is one of them.
    See my book review of SUPERFUEL by Richard Martin Apr. 20, 2012 and also
    My review of Thorium: energy cheaper than coal by Robert Hargraves
  6. Another post that is a direct copy and paste but felt that my readers needed to see
    How Congress Goes Nuclear May. 1, 2012
  7. Nuclear Bloggers Extraordinaire exposing the dishonesty May. 18, 2012
  8. The getting-to-be-obvious fact, to many people, that the NRC has been controlled by anti-nuclear forces like Harry Reid’s sidekick Jaczko
    Jaczko announced his resignation May. 21, 2012
  9. Obama keeps picking the staff based on what appears politically correct.
    Obama picks an anti-nuke!!! MacFarlane has no nuclear background. We must object. May. 24, 2012
  10. A different take on the subject of Yucca and the situation in Nevada
    The History of Nuclear Waste told by Matt Stroud Jun. 15, 2012
  11. My plea to appeal to rational minds about FukushimaMusic and facts to calm residents near Fukushima Jul. 2, 2012
  12. My view about how making the argument for global change is too ambitious for many and that it leads people to remain fence-sitters on an important issue.How the focus on climate change allows complacency – macro vs micro Aug. 16, 2012
  13. About how the close contests for leadership have made the campaigners into phonies and adoescents.Fear of losing only happens in close contests. Rod Adams explains the low risk campaigning. Sep. 20, 2012
  14. When leadership is sadly missing among world leaders my letter to a new candidate spells out what is needed to make them better leaders.A Letter to the Newest Federal Liberal Candidate – Justin Trudeau Oct. 7, 2012
  15. Pertaining to Fossil Fuel Industry Fighting Nuclear Using Propaganda Oct. 8, 2012
  16. Social Risk Assessment and Data Mining vs. Good PR Planning? Nov. 14, 2012
Action List Nuclear Advocacy Uncategorized

Your Nuclear Advocate Activist Kit

The is a shopping site for Popatomic Designs that promote Nuclear energy.

http://www.printfection.com/popatomic

prices are in the $7.49 – $56.99 range
All proceeds benefit the Nuclear Literacy Project. (NuclearLiteracy.org)
You can choose Can Coolers, Hats, T-Shirts, Mugs, Aprons, Zipper Hoodies, Jerseys
     

Also jewelry at

http://ficonel.com

Prices range from $150 to $2500

More Reading:

  • Rod Adams post Energizing Pro-Nuclear Activists to do Battle
  • Using the “What’s your alternative” question. by Steve Skutnik
  • Also by Steve Skutnik on Dealing with the perception of risk
  • ‘Us vs. them’ mentality may hamper nuclear communications
  • History of the Antinuclear Movement (3 parts)
    It’s good to understand your opponents.
  • MY OWN BLOGS: Nuclear Advocacy 101   ~   What do we teach people?   ~   Moving from denial and catastrophic fatalism to positive action   ~   Writing to Congress
  • Uncategorized

    Using nuclear saves an increase in CO2 caused by recharging electric cars.

    Another post that was sitting in the draft box:

    Two scenarios exist for cities and cars that would enable our future cities to maintain a low carbon footprint.

    1. Get rid of cars and use trains and buses which is what seems to be happening in Europe and

    2. Use electric cars but use electricity from nuclear energy to charge the cars.

    The idea that millions of cars need coal and natural gas plants to create the energy needed to charge the cars is just shifting the pollution of the air to the power plants. This is why nuclear is so appealing.  The energy density and the fact that no emissions are created to produce electricity is the best reason to increase nuclear energy.

    North America is a car culture. To expect vast numbers of people to give up their cars is not realistic. Somehow we need to get away from a car culture but that will not happen soon. Maybe if we are devastated and have major floods as a result of climate change people can be weaned off of cars. But in the meantime there is wide support for getting rid of dependence on gasoline. Electric cars seem to be the answer.  And the answer to the increase in energy demand to run the cars will best be handled by nuclear energy.

    No matter what people may think of the effects that the Fukushima events had on Nuclear Energy the biggest mistake Japan could make at this time would be to abandon nuclear power. Japan was well on it’s way to eliminating gas and diesel vehicles and switching to electric vehicles. The set back that eliminating nuclear would have on the econ0my and the environment would be devastating. In order to keep the energy balance needed to sustain the populations need for transportation and the energy needed to now rebuild Japans north is not going to happen from renewable sources.

     

    Nuclear Advocacy Uncategorized

    Nuclear Advocacy 101

    Another Post that was sitting in the Draft box:

    Have you thought about supporting Nuclear but were afraid to because too many of the people you know hate anything Nuclear?

    You are not alone. But a revolution is needed in desperate times. No revolution ever started with everyone sitting on the fence.

    How serious is Fukushima’s nuclear accident or more accurately freak of nature disaster?

    1. The reactors were 40 years old and the regulators did not keep their equipment up to date as the American equivalent reactors did.

    2. The actual radiation released is misrepresented by the media and the decision to use Bequerels instead of  Milli Sieverts

    the average natural background radiation in the United States is 2.6 mSv. The legal limit for annual exposure by nuclear workers is 50 mSv, and in Japan that limit was just raised for emergency workers to 250 mSv.

    The highest specific exposures reported so far were of two workers at the Fukushima plant who received doses of 170 to 180 mSv on March 24 — lower than the new Japanese standard, but still enough to cause some symptoms (reports say the men had rashes on the areas exposed to radioactive water – probably pychosomatic).

    3. Iodine and Cesium were the initial concerns at Fukushima but iodine has a short half life and is no longer a threat and Cesium has low solubility. The fear that is could get into the fish is unwarranted.
    On the ocean near Japan see report by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency
     

    Uncategorized

    Media Disappointed by Nuclear’s Amazing Performance

    When major disasters like Fukushima fail to materialize the media is disappointed. The truth is that Nuclear Power Plants are designed to respond to violent storms and, although never tested, terrorist attacks. So all they have left in order to get attention is to make exaggerated and false claims often twisting the truth in order to attract readers.
    http://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2011/09/30/nuclear_plants_withstand_natures_fury_106297.html