Tag Archives: Forbes

Memo To Forbes Writer: Nuclear Energy Is NOT Clean Energy

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent

As I was scrolling through my LinkedIn feed this weekend, I ran across an article from Forbes magazine writer Michael Shellenberger that both made me laugh out loud and shake my head.

The headline of the article was “Had They Bet On Nuclear, Not Renewables, Germany & California Would Already Have 100% Clean Power.” Which, if you think about it, is like saying, “If my dog meowed, she’d be a cat.”

Shellenberger bases his article on a study by Environmental Progress, which a quick glance at their website shows is a shill organization for the nuclear power industry. Something you’d think Shellenberger, who writes about energy and the environment, might either be aware of or at least might want to disclose in the article.

[wds id=”3″]

Instead, Shellenberger wants to pretend that this is an organization like the Sierra Club or Greenpeace that are just interested in preserving the environment. He wags his finger at the denizens of the Global Climate Action Summit for not mentioning nuclear, and then goes ahead with his analysis of Germany and California, shaking his head at their foolishness for not investing enormous amounts of money in the nuclear energy.

Here are a couple of key issues that Shellenberger, in full nuclear hawk mode, ignores. First off, and most importantly, nuclear power is not a clean energy source. Even if you ignore the potential safety concerns about having a nuclear power plant in your back yard (and as someone that has two within 100 miles of his home in two directions, I have those concerns), there’s still the question of what to do with the spent fuel rods. Until you finally build that storage facility inside Yucca Mountain, you’re going to have to put those fuel rods somewhere – and right now there’s no safe place to put them.

Furthermore, he conveniently ignores the costs of storing those rods in his evaluation of costs of nuclear plants, which is something that get ignored by most nuclear proponents. And given the most recent struggles in constructing nuclear plants in Georgia and elsewhere, I’m going to respectfully suggest that the construction costs on which Environmental Progress based its projections may be a little understated.

This discussion is not academic. They are currently debating whether to include nuclear as a clean energy in Arizona’s renewable portfolio standard. So articles like this one from Forbes, dishonest as they are, are important to call out when they appear. Let’s make sure this one doesn’t go unanswered.

More:

Had They Bet On Nuclear, Not Renewables, Germany & California Would Already Have 100% Clean Power

Forbes Article Reveals 320 GW Of Untapped Solar Potential

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent

What Happened:Long-time solar industry denizen Silvio Marcacci took to Forbes to argue that low- and middle-income Americans could represent a 320 GW untapped solar market in the United States.

  • Marcacci’s conclusions are based on a new report out of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory – the first of its kind – that made the assertion.
  • Marcacci writes: “NREL’s research shows that most rooftop solar technical potential is highly concentrated in the states and urban areas with significant building stock and high levels of existing residential solar deployment: California, Maryland, Massachusetts, and New Jersey.”

    • Forbes

    SolarWakeup’s View:  First off, let me congratulate Silvio Marcacci on landing in the pages of Forbes. Silvio has always been a great champion for solar, and seeing his name (and our message) reaching some of the world’s wealthiest investors and businesspeople is a sight for sore eyes. So thank you, Silvio.

    [wds id=”3″]

    Silvio’s piece centers on a new report out from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) that says, in essence, solar needs to get out from the neatly tree-lined, gated and wealthy communities it has traditionally served and into the low- to middle-income markets, where the customer acquisition may be more difficult – but at 320 GW, is clearly a hugely lucrative potential market.

    The key, NREL says, is moving away from a single-family-home model of solar development and into a more collective model like community solar. Silvio points out that California has successfully implemented two programs (SASH and MASH) that could serve as models for the rest of the country (as California is wont to do, particularly within the solar space).

    He adds:

    Solar developers can play a role tapping this market. NREL reports 60% of LMI residential potential exists on renter-occupied and multi-family buildings where long-term contracts may not work for residents – in other words, not single-family homes in affluent neighborhoods.

    This means community solar or shared solar projects could be installed on large buildings like government facilities, community centers, or churches and then opened up to LMI households through community solar, virtual net metering, or other shared subscription programs.

    I’m so glad someone is pointing this out in such august pages as Forbes – it’s a message investors, and the solar industry, both need to hear.

    More:

    This Untapped Market Could Add 320 Gigawatts Of New U.S. Residential Solar Energy