Published: September 06, 2008 11:32 pm            

The nuclear solution

I must reply to Dr. Skorodin’s letter (Aug. 29) concerning nuclear power.

He mentions the fossil fuel emissions generated in constructing nuclear power plants, ignoring the fact the same emissions are generated in building any kind of power plant.

Nuclear power plants have capital costs (hence, initial energy inputs) per kilowatt somewhat higher than solar and wind driven power plants.

But whereas solar and wind plants deliver on the average only about 35-40 percent of capacity (because neither wind nor sun are always available), the existing 100-plus U.S. nuclear power plants are base-loaded at about 95 percent of capacity, providing reliable, clean, low-cost energy around the clock.

U.S. nuclear power plants are inherently safe — no one has died as a result of commercial nuclear power plant accidents in the U.S. The U.S. Navy operates more than 100 reactors with a comparable safety record.

There are engineering solutions for safe, long-term spent fuel storage — the choice should be based on economics and national security.

I have 57 years of experience in developing and teaching design methods for the large-scale heat exchangers used in industry. I have been directly involved with all of the power generating systems that require transferring large amounts of heat — nuclear, conventional fossil fuel, geothermal, solar thermal and ocean thermal.

We will have to use all of these technologies to solve our energy and environmental problems. But if you don’t think nuclear power is part of the solution, you are part of the problem.

Kenneth J. Bell

Stillwater

        

• Click to discuss this story with other readers on our forums.