GE Nuclear Merges With Hitachi for the "Global Nuclear Renaissance"
GE's new Advanced Boiling Water Reactor
There are a lot of reasons for TreeHuggers to be wary of nuclear power, now being touted as "the only existing power technology which could replace coal in base load." We prefer what Bill McDonough said: "I love nuclear energy! It's just that I prefer fusion to fission. And it just so happens that there's an enormous fusion reactor safely banked a few million miles from us. It delivers more than we could ever use in just about 8 minutes." We never understood why GE, which buries its nuclear business on a separate website far away from ecomagination, gets away with this greenwashing- one could cut them slack before and call it a legacy business; Now they admit that "GE's commitment to its nuclear business, and the overall industry, has never been higher in our 50-year history," said Andy White, president and CEO of GE Energy's nuclear business. "Nuclear power remains an integral part of achieving a balanced energy portfolio and one of the many solutions to establishing a more sustainable energy future for the entire world." Their latest press release (which can actually be found on their main website) says "By combining their resources, the new alliance will create an attractive platform for growth and also signal the beginning of a new era for both companies as they continue to position themselves to compete in what many in the nuclear industry are calling a "global renaissance for nuclear energy." and goes on..."This nuclear alliance further underscores GE's commitment to the industry and to doing what is necessary to make us stronger for the next generation of nuclear energy," said Andy White, president and CEO of GE's nuclear business, which is based in Wilmington, N.C.
Read this article in the ::Pacific Ecologist for the case against nukes; in it a study by Amory Lovins is quoted: It looked at the costs of nuclear versus improved energy efficiency and found every dollar invested in energy efficiency displaces 6.8 times more carbon than the same investment in nuclear power. "To the extent investments in nuclear power divert funds away from efficiency," the study concludes, "the pursuit of a nuclear response to greenhouse warming would effectively exacerbate the problem."