Customer Reviews

Nuclear Energy Now: Why the Time Has Come for the World's Most Misunderstood Energy Source

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

NEN is filled with tons of facts, yet is a quick read and a very good primer on the subject of nuclear energy. For those who are concerned about carbon emissions, nuclear energy is the ONLY economically viable alternative to petroleum for electricity generation. Anyone who thinks solar and wind can fill this void is simply wrong. It takes hundreds of windmills to produce the same power as a single nuclear or coal plant. Solar cells are approximately 20% efficient, and like wind farms, require vast tracts of land. Additionally, both are entirely dependent on weather conditions. Sheryl Crow's vacuous endorsement of these "alternatives" on the Bill Maher show once again demonstrates the majority's poverty of understanding of these basic facts. This is not surprising; nuclear energy has received a bad rap from environmentalists for decades. Issues with waste and proliferation are easily solvable with prudent policies. The real problem is fear: an intense, quivering fear cultivated by the environmental movement that leaves us incapable of dealing with our energy problems in an intelligent manner.

Although I am not a global warming catastrophist, I believe it is prudent to limit what we pump into the atmosphere. Sure, driving hybrid cars helps a little, but remember that all of our automobiles combined emit less than half of the carbon produced by our power plants. The greatest single strategy to limit carbon emissions is producing electricity with nuclear power. Environmentalists need to abandon their religious dogma and accept this fact; otherwise, they relinquish their right to shrill hectoring about global warming.

Here is what I would propose as a simple roadmap to lower CO2 emissions:

1) Gradually phase out all coal/gas/oil power plants and replace with nuclear plants.
2) Continue to develop rapid-recharge high-capacity lithium ion battery technology for automobiles.
3) Investigate other energy storage alternatives like ultracapacitors, which may be practical in the near future.
4) Reform and streamline industrial processes to reduce emissions.
5) Investigate prudent sources of ethanol (no corn, please) and biodiesel fuels.
6) Continue nuclear fusion research.

This book purports to support nuclear power and then doesn't make much of a case for it. I am sorry that I wasted my money on this book.

Try Power to Save the World: The Truth About Nuclear Energy by Gwyneth Craven who is a 30 year green activist and makes a fact based argument for nuclear. She puts forward all the standard arguments against nuclear and shows how they don't hold up. She spent 8 years researching her book with another environmentalist who works at the Sandia National Laboratory.

"Nuclear Energy Now" is an excellent book about the present status of nuclear power. Its starting point is the realization that increasing amounts of carbon dioxide emissions are causing global warming and climate change. Combustion of fossil fuels is producing this chemically very stable and optically active gas. There seems to be only one effective way to stop its accumulation in the atmosphere; we must stop all fossil fuel combustion!
The industrial revolution of the last two centuries has made many nations and its citizens very prosperous. The ready availability of huge amounts of inexpensive energy facilitated this burst of industrial activity. World economies have become utterly dependent on the unlimited supply of electricity, heating gases, and transportation fuels.
"Nuclear Energy Now" shows that it is possible to build nuclear plants that can in due time replace all fossil fuel fired electric power plants. Nuclear energy cannot only replace fossil fuels in this energy sector. Nuclear fuel costs and nuclear plant costs are low enough to produce electricity at very competitive prices.
However, nuclear power has a major image problem. The public does not understand the technology, is deadly afraid of nuclear radiation, does not believe that nuclear reactors are safe, and fears that the proliferation of nuclear power across the world will create security problems.
The authors try to dispel these concerns. They make the point that the US has an outstanding safety record and that not a single person has ever been killed in an accident. They also point to France, which is producing close to 80% of its electricity from nuclear fuels. They ascertain that nuclear power plants do not emit greenhouse gases or radioactive substances and are safe.
Nuclear energy is the only viable option for replacing fossil fuels for electric power generation. Solar power, wind power, and other renewable energies can only replace a fraction of the electric power, which we need to keep our economies healthy.
Replacing petroleum for powering the world's transportation systems may be an even more challenging problem than electricity generation and is even more critical for the functioning of the world's economies.
The two authors, Alan M. Herbst and George W. Hopley have written an outstanding text that spells out the unique promises and the continuing problems of nuclear power.
In the end, the reader is left with a choice. Are the safety measures and security provisions described by the authors acceptable or are they still found wanting.
We need alternate ways to produce electric power urgently. Renewable energies cannot contribute enough power soon enough. Nuclear power seems our only hope. One question keeps lingering; can more be done to eliminate remaining safety and security concerns?

If you are only interested in economic, this book is your book.

However,if you want to learn something about Nuclear Energy and you are no an enginer "A CASE FOR NUCLEAR-GENERATED ELECTRICITY ... or why I think nuclear power is cool and why it is important that you think so too", written by Scott W. Heaberlin is your book.

"THE REVENGE OF GAIA" written by James Lovelock is your book if you are the kind of guy who enjoys learning and who is worried about environmental isuues.

Have a look in internet ....EFN - Environmentalists For Nuclear Energy.

Bye and thanks. I afraid of my English is a bit sad. See you.

Scientists and economists are working diligently to determine ways of producing sufficient electrical energy to supply our increasing demands. Electrical energy must be produced both economically and with the least environmental impact.

Awareness concerning the increased production of Carbon Dioxide by electrical generation facilities has spurred new interest in energy sources other than fossil fuels. Carbon Dioxide, an odorless colorless gas is an important part of the carbon cycle which consists of the production and consumption of Carbon Dioxide in our earth. The balance of Carbon Dioxide in our atmosphere has increased in part due to our expanding consumption of electrical energy.

The production of electrical energy in the United States is largely dependent on the burning fossil fuels. The burning of fossil fuel such as coal, oil, and gas increase the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, thus negatively impacting the carbon balance in our atmosphere.The increased output is a concern of the citizens in the United States and World, but what can we do to help? Nuclear Energy Now, by Alan Herbst and George Hopley describes how we can solve both our increased need for energy while reducing carbon dioxide emissions.

The authors of Nuclear Energy Now give a compelling explanation as to "why the time has come for the world's most misunderstood energy source". I find their solutions easy to understand with a wealth of information to support their thesis.

Nuclear Energy now is a ready reference of information concerning the nuclear energy industry and world energy usage. Persons wanting detail information regarding the benefits of increased nuclear energy production will find a modicum of information. Those wanting to survey the major points with minimal detail, will find their summaries both compelling and logical.

If you are like me and want to receive detailed information concerning the use of Nuclear Energy and the benefits to our environment and economy, this book will serve you well. If you are researching only one aspect of this large and complex issue, you will also find Nuclear Energy Now a necessary reference.

As someone who has studied the pros and cons of nuclear energy for over 30 years, I am always interested to see what reasons people muster for supporting what I have come to see as "Jurassic technology" (doomed to extinction because of inherent insupportability). This book reads like a satire. For example, the authors list the huge cost overruns in nuclear plant construction, and note that nuclear "overnight" KWh costs are almost 4 times those of natural gas and double coal's. For them, those turn into reasons why we *should* pursue nuclear electricity. They say that if we ignore the environmental legislation that gave nukes a "clean image" (note: "image"--even the authors understand that the reality is not clean), they would be price-competitive. And their safety record--since the last big accident--is exemplary!
Their clinching argument (p. 185): "Simply stated, if new reactor technology is good enough for Tanzania, Portugal and Mexico, it should be good enough for further expansion in the United States." Why sure, if those global leaders in developing new technologies (as the authors note, Tanzania can't even afford to construct a nuke), renowned for their stringent environmental laws and oversight, are thinking about building new nukes, why shouldn't the US?
I have to believe the authors wrote this with tongue firmly in cheek.