CASEnergy Coalition

What Others Are Saying

Whole Earth Catalog founder and renowned environmentalist Stewart Brand speaking out in support of nuclear energy on National Public Radio’s Weekend Edition on February 20, 2010: “I surprised myself. I used to be, you know, pretty much a kneejerk environmentalist on this particular subject. And then because of climate change I reinvestigated the matter and discovered that I’d been misled in many of the details on how nuclear works. And I finally got to the point where I’m so pro-nuclear now that I would I would be in favor of it even if climate change and greenhouse gases were not an issue.”

Energy Secretary Steven Chu, discussing the Obama administration’s proposal for an additional $36 billion in nuclear-power plant loan guarantees and how the total $54.5 million in support will help jump start the industry, on Bloomberg TV February 1, 2010: “We hope–and the plan is–that we start some nuclear reactors. We think that this is going to enable the industry to invest in seven to ten new nuclear reactors. With that, there should be enough confidence in the private sector to pick this up. That’s always been our plan: to get it started. Show that you can build reactors on budget, on time. And then let the rest be taken up by the private sector.”

Energy Secretary Steven Chu, in a Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing on January 21, 2010: “The White House is supportive of nuclear. We see this as part of the solution. …Right now 20 percent of our electricity is from nuclear we would like to maintain that, possibly grow that. For that reason we are working aggressively to help restart the American nuclear industry with loan guarantees with research in the out years that will lead to more advanced, safer nuclear power.”

Bill Gates, in CNET’s energy blog, Green Tech, “Bill Gates thinks big on energy and climate” on January 21, 2010: “Nuclear energy is worth pursuing, wind and solar are good but have limitations, and the government is putting minuscule amounts of money into energy R&D dollars. So says software tycoon turned philanthropist Bill Gates, who launched his Gates Notes Web site on Wednesday to share his big-picture ideas on big topics. … ‘[Nuclear is] the only thing we have today other than hydrocarbons that provides a lot of power and you could build a lot more of it,’ [he said].”

“When it comes to what energy technologies make most sense in the years ahead, [Gates]…and former Microsoft chief technology officer, Nathan Myhrvold invested in a Seattle-area nuclear power company that is working on a reactor design that could use the spent fuel from existing nuclear reactors to make electricity for decades.”

Carol Browner, Director of the White House Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy, in an online video chat streamed live on Facebook and Whitehouse.gov on January 11, 2010: “The President believes that nuclear needs to be a part of our energy future. I think if you believe, as we do, that climate change is a serious problem, it’s a problem that needs to be addressed, then you need to be open to all the ways in which we can produce energy in a clean manner. And so nuclear obviously is one of those. We have been working with the nuclear industry to understand exactly what it is they need. We have not build a nuclear plant in this country in a long time. But we want to work with the industry, to make that happen in the not too distant future.”

Edwin D. Hill, CASEnergy Coalition member and president of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, in his op-ed – “FPL Rate Hike Would Help Florida Create Jobs” – published by the Tallahassee Democrat on January 6, 2010, reflects on Florida’s rate hike proposal that if passed, will help create new clean, safe nuclear power: “The Florida Power and Light Company (FPL) has placed a $1.2 billion rate increase request before the Public Service Commission. That sounds like a big number, and some prominent opponents, including the head of the Office of Public Counsel and several political candidates, have raised their voices. But make no mistake — rejecting this increase would mean losing a golden opportunity to create jobs, promote consumer savings and strengthen Florida’s economic future.”

Andrew C. Klein, Professor of Nuclear Engineering at Oregon State University and a regular contributor to the Progressive Policy Institute’s blog, the Progressive Fix, in his piece “Why Progressives Should Be More Open to Nuclear Energy” on November 18^th, 2009 : “Progressives must consider the role that nuclear energy can and will play in the U.S. and around the world. The ‘Just Say No’ approach to nuclear energy has proven to be counterproductive to our national interests. Today, the world is moving toward an energy future that is cleaner and less reliant on fossil fuels—a future that includes nuclear power. It is time for progressives to assume a leading role in helping to shape that future.”

Margo Thorning, senior vice president and chief economist with the American Council for Capital Formation, speaking about creating jobs through the expansion of clean energy, including nuclear, during a Senate Finance Committee hearing about climate change and job creation on November 10, 2009: “One of the positive steps that we could do to try to ensure job growth — as well as energy security, and also make an impact on the growth in greenhouse gas emissions — first, we should expand access to onshore and offshore reserves. We should also expand and make it easier to build nuclear generating capacity. Nuclear can certainly be a big part of the solution here.”

R. Bruce Josten, executive vice president for Government Affairs at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, in a letter to Senators Boxer and Inhofe, leading members of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, outlining the Chamber’s support for strong federal climate change legislation, which includes provisions for nuclear, November 3, 2009: “Senators Kerry and Graham have set forth a positive, practical and realistic framework for legislation…The Chamber agrees…in particular that legislation should: minimize the impact on major emitters; reduce price volatility for consumers; protect global competitiveness; invest in renewable energy sources; take advantage of nuclear power; streamline the permit system; make us the “Saudi Arabia of clean coal” by fostering carbon capture and sequestration technology…and increase our own energy security and energy efficiency.”

Stewart Brand, in an excerpted Q&A with energy reporter Andy Bast posted on Newsweek’s Green Tech Blog, titled “An Icon of Environmentalism, Talks About Embracing Nuclear Power,“ October 21, 2009: Q: Is nuclear green? A: “Yes. Having been careful not to look into nuclear power for many years, when I began considering it, I thought it was green primarily in the context of greenhouse gases and climate change.” Q: Is there any hope for the upcoming climate change summit in Copenhagen? A: “Focusing on the nuclear issue, I would trust that they will not make the Kyoto mistake of refusing to give carbon credits to nuclear power.”

James Tulenko, Director of the Laboratory for Development of Advanced Nuclear Fuels and Materials, University of Florida, responding to a piece in the Miami Herald published on August 11 – “Florida OK’s plan to build nuclear plant” – in his Letter to the Editor, “Make nuclear power part of Florida’s future,” September 16, 2009: “Nuclear energy in the United States in past 20 years has proved it is economical and safe… Our state and our nation need a robust, diversified set of energy sources, and that includes nuclear if we are to successfully control climate change and reduce environmental problems. The Levy County plant should be seen as an important component of a broad energy policy that will take us into the heart of this century. The additional money we pay now will save us from paying much more in the future.”

Rebecca Smith, Energy and Public Utilities Reporter for the Wall Street Journal, discussing nuclear power in her feature piece, “The New Nukes,” September 8, 2009: “If there ever were a time that seemed ripe for nuclear energy, it’s now. For the first time in decades, popular opinion is on the industry’s side. A majority of Americans think nuclear power, which emits virtually no carbon dioxide, is a safe and effective way to battle climate change, according to recent polls. At the same time, legislators are showing renewed interest in nuclear as they hunt for ways to slash greenhouse-gas emissions. The industry is seizing this chance to move out of the shadow of Three Mile Island and Chernobyl and show that it has solved the three big problems that have long dogged it: cost, safety and waste.”

David Crane, president and chief executive of NRG Energy, discussing a “modern energy plan” comprising “real solutions to climate change” in a Washington Post op-ed, August 25, 2009: “A progressive, pragmatic energy plan would focus on taking the first steps toward national energy sustainability. It would start with technologies that are ready for large-scale deployment but are concentrated on regions where they can be demonstrated and deployed at scale to their best advantage… Nuclear energy should be the ‘renewable of the South.’”

Jim Rogers, Chairman, President & CEO, Duke Energy Corporation discussing “Why Nuclear Power Is Part of Our Future” in a Wall Street Journal op-ed, August 5, 2009: “While the U.S. may be trailing on renewable energy and storage technology, we are still the world’s largest operator of commercial nuclear power…Additionally, the U.S. remains a leader in researching and developing nuclear technologies. Our national labs and private sector know-how provide the resources and the scientific foundation for the U.S. to compete as a global leader in commercial nuclear power…Investing in new nuclear power plants, which produce electricity 24 hours a day and seven days a week, can be a major growth engine for our economy.”

Wall Street Journal’s Environmental Capital energy reporter Keith Johnson, discussing nuclear energy’s role as a clean baseload source in “Have Renewables Really Eclipsed Nuclear Power?”July 30, 2009: “In the electricity business, nuclear power’s importance is unchanged–it provided 21% of America’s juice in the first four months of 2009, topped only by coal (46% of the mix).”

Mark H. Ayers, President, Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO, as quoted in a piece for Politico’s energy issue, July 13, 2009: “We will work closely with the nuclear energy industry to help pursue the adoption of a diverse American energy portfolio that places a high priority on the re-emergence of nuclear power.”

Gilbert J. Brown, Professor & Coordinator of UMass-Lowell’s Nuclear Engineering Program, discussing the energy and climate bill in an op-ed, July 6, 2009: “Given the environmental and economic benefits of nuclear power, the White House needs to ensure that this reliable source reaches its full potential. Obama must impress on Congress that the main reason for establishing a renewable energy standard is to reduce carbon emissions and dependence on fossil fuels. Nuclear power does both.”

Brit Hume, senior political analyst for FOX News Channel, on Fox News Sunday, June 28, 2009: “If you look at one thing that would make a difference on clean energy, it’s nuclear power…”

Allison Costic, CNN Correspondent, reporting on climate change legislation for CNN’s Energy Fix segment, June 25, 2009: “The climate change bill, Heidi, could end up being a huge boom to the nuclear industry as a whole. The latest version reportedly makes new reactors eligible for loans from a green energy development bank, and that’s just the latest sign that nuclear power could be headed for a comeback.”

Allison Costic, CNN Correspondent, reporting on the recently announced nuclear power plant in Ohio for CNN’s Energy Fix segment, June 25, 2009: “Now, the nuclear regulatory commission still has to approve the Ohio plant, but the project could create 4,000 jobs during construction and 700 permanent ones at the plant.”

J.W. Eerkens, Nuclear Physicist and Adjunct Research Professor, University of Missouri, discussing the closing of the Rancho Seco nuclear reactor near Sacramento in a Sacramento Bee op-ed, June 14, 2009: “Nuclear power is the only practical solution to avoid dependence on foreign oil and gas, to overcome oil and gas depletion by mid-century, and to ameliorate global warming.”

Sir Richard Branson, CEO of Virgin Atlantic Airlines, during a speech at the National Press Club, May 14, 2009: “Governments need to realize that the cleanest fuel, the safest fuel, if you look statistically, is nuclear energy … we need to try and produce as many nuclear power stations as possible, particularly if we are going to try to combat global warming, seeing as it [nuclear energy] is one of the only real weapons to try to combat global warming we have.”

David Owens, Executive Vice-President at the Edison Electric Institute, in an interview with Reuters, May 6, 2009: “Just to respond to climate-change issues, we are going to need new energy-supply technologies such as nuclear and advanced coal plants with carbon capture and storage.”

Thomas Neff, Senior Researcher at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, discussing the strong future of renewable energies in an interview with Energy & Environment Publishing, May 4, 2009: “Nuclear is the bridge to that future.”

William Johnson, President and CEO of Progress Energy, in an interview with Scientific American regarding the environmental benefits of clean nuclear energy, April 28, 2009: “If public officials are serious about reducing greenhouse gas emissions, nuclear power is the best available technology in the utility industry and must be part of the equation.”

Marc Gunther, Fortune reporter, on his his shifting stance on nuclear, April 26, 2009: “Many years ago, I covered protests again the Seabrook nuclear power plant in N.H., for a left-wing publication. My sympathies were with the protestors. Now I’m firmly undecided, and determined to learn more. Given the threat of climate change and the safety record of nuclear plants in the U.S. – especially compared to the alternative of mining and burning coal – it seems like the right time to rethink nukes.”

Dr. Clint Wolfe, executive director of Citizens for Nuclear Technology Awareness, on Nuclear Energy in South Carolina, March 27, 2009: “Nuclear power is South Carolina’s energy mainstay. It accounts for 51.2 percent of the state’s electricity … according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Safe and dependable, nuclear power supplies electricity to one out of every two homes and businesses in South Carolina, without producing any air pollution or greenhouse-gas emissions.”

Doug Biden, president of Electric Power Generation Association in Pennsylvania, March 25, 2009: “There’s a lot of support for nuclear now, and most of that support is borne out of a concern for the desire to have emissions-free energy sources.”

Richard Lester, director of the MIT Industrial Performance Center and professor of nuclear science and engineering at MIT. “Clearing the Path Toward a Nuclear Renaissance,” The Boston Globe, Oct. 21, 2008: “The reality is that the world has little chance of avoiding the worst risks of global climate change unless we build many more nuclear power plants.” Joe Shuster, Author of “Beyond Fossil Fools,” “Project Energy: The Future Of Nuclear Power,” WCCO, September 14, 2008: “[H]istorically the nuclear energy has been the safest industry of all industries, period. There’s not been one death, by the way, in the United States from nuclear energy”

Dennis Spurgeon, DOE Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy, “DOE, NRC Issue Licensing Roadmap For Next-Generation Nuclear Plant Energy Department Documents and Publications,” ContentWorks, August 18, 2008: “Nuclear energy is vital to our nation’s energy security and the NGNP has the potential to extend the benefits to bring nuclear technology to a whole new sector of the U.S. economy.”

Said Cindy Schwartz, Director of the Maryland League of Conservation Voters, “Fire Up Those Atoms: Nuclear Power is Coming,” The Daily News-Record, August 6, 2008: “The technology has changed, and the political and environmental landscape has changed. If you’re concerned about climate change, where’s the power coming from… That’s why you’re not hearing the same opposition you heard 20 years ago.”

Lisa Stiles, Project Manager, Strategic Staffing and Knowledge Management, Dominion Nuclear, CASEnergy Jobs Launch, June 17, 2008: “As a college student, I chose to study nuclear engineering because I was fascinated by the science and I believed nuclear science and technology make important contributions to society. Working in the industry more than met those expectations and I’ve enjoyed many challenging opportunities to learn and grow. Plus, I know I’m doing my part to make the world a better place.”

Gilbert J. Brown, PhD., Professor and Coordinator, Nuclear Engineering Program, University of Massachusetts Lowell, CASEnergy Jobs Launch, June 17, 2008: “The industry needs engineers, technicians and other professionals to support, operate and maintain existing nuclear plants. Moreover, well educated and trained workers are needed for all of the new plants that are being ordered to meet growing energy demand while cutting emissions of carbon dioxide and to conduct research and development on the next generation of reactors. To cultivate job creation and seize on the opportunities ahead, we must invest in our educational infrastructure by strengthening existing educational and training programs while developing new and innovative programs to attract and retain a skilled workforce.”

Michael Kurzeja, Vice President, North American Young Generation in Nuclear, CASEnergy Jobs Launch, June 17, 2008: “The nuclear industry is experiencing growth in both new plant builds and a multitude of exciting, rewarding and diverse job opportunities. Today’s young professionals in the nuclear industry are excited to be part of an industry that will not only support long-term career opportunities but also provides the world with clean, safe, and reliable energy and innovative nuclear science & technology solutions.”

Ben Stein, lawyer, writer, actor and economist, “Running Out of Fuel, But Not Out of Ideas,” New York Times, May 25, 2008: “As my pal Glenn Beck, the conservative commentator, says, we need a new moon-shot mentality here. We need to turn coal into oil into gasoline, to use nuclear power wherever we can”

RPI President Shirley Jackson Lee, “Regulator says more nuclear engineers needed,” Schenectady Daily Gazette, April 24, 2008: “As we can see, as other nations develop and our own energy needs continue to grow, energy security, which means security of supply coupled with environmental and climate effects, becomes a larger and larger issue,” Jackson said. “The solution then to that requires a broad public policy and technological approach that ultimately rests with having myriad sources of energy and nuclear is one of those.”

Thomas Cochran, a senior nuclear scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council, “Nuclear power praised at House committee hearing,” McClatchy Newspapers, April 24, 2008: “Nuclear power is in the mix…It’s a mature industry. When it can compete, we should let it.”

Lord Nicholas Stern, “Stern Warns Climate Change is Considerably Worse Than Previously Estimated,” The Independent, April 17, 2008: We badly underestimated the degree of damages and the risks of climate change. All of the links in the chain are on average worse than we thought a couple of years ago. We need to have zero carbon electricity, or very close to it, by 2050. That means carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) in electricity by 2050, it means nuclear, it means renewables.”

Susan Eisenhower, former President Dwight Eisenhower’s granddaughter, chairman emeritus of the Eisenhower Institute, Jacksonville Business Journal, April 7, 2008: “all energy sources need to be tapped, but that nuclear power holds the most promise in the face of rising coal, oil and natural gas costs.”

Tom Tanton, Sacramento Union Columnist, Sacramento Union, March 26, 2008: “It’s time for California to follow their (Rep.Devore and Gov.Schwarzenegger) lead and recognize the promise of nuclear power for environmental and economic reasons.”

Merryn Somerset Webb, former stockbroker and editor of Money Week, “Merryn on Money: Nuclear Energy,” The Times Online (U.K.), March 23, 2008: “So for the foreseeable future at least, cutting carbon emissions and creating energy security in the West really means going nuclear. This–despite the various misgivings many have about its security–is an amazingly efficient way of generating energy. Building reactors is expensive, but in terms of the important thing–cost per kilowatt per hour over their lifetimes–they easily beat all other forms of alternative energy.”

Tucker Carlson, MSNBC, February 25, 2008: “…if you`re concerned about greenhouse gases, if you`re concerned about people dying because of the energy that you`re producing, nuclear power strikes me as in the moment the safest form of energy there is.”

Tony Kreindler, Environmental Defense Fund, “Nuclear poised to take slice of energy pie,” Chattanooga Times Free Press, February 25, 2008: “Given the scope of the climate problem and the emissions problem, we need to look at all the energy options we have, and nuclear is one of them.”

Gwyneth Cravens, “Why America Needs Atomic Anne,” International Herald Tribune, February 9, 2008: “Nuclear power is the most efficient energy source we have,” said Gwyneth Cravens, author of “Power to Save the World: The Truth About Nuclear Power.” “Uranium is energy-dense. If you got all your electricity from nuclear for your lifetime, your share of the waste would fit in a soda can.”

Vinod Khosla, Sun Microsystems co-founder turned venture capitalist, “5 Questions for Vinod Khosla,” Earth2Tech, January 30, 2008: “For every nuclear plant that environmentalists avoided, they ended up causing two coal plants to be built. That’s the history of the last 20 years. Most new power plants in this country are coal, because the environmentalists opposed nuclear. When you ask someone like the NRDC, ‘Do you prefer nuclear or coal…’ They’ll say ‘We prefer nuclear to coal, but we don’t want either.’ It doesn’t work that way; we need power.”

Alan Greenspan, former chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, ” The Long-Term Energy Squeeze,” The Age of Turbulence, pg. 453-454: “Given steps that have been taken over the years to make nuclear energy safer and the obvious environmental advantages it offers in reducing CO2 emissions, there is no longer a persuasive case against nuclear generation at the expense of coal…the safe guards at nuclear power in the United States are such that the public has never suffered a radiation-induced death or a serious injury owing to a breakdown…I believe we significantly underuse nuclear power.”

Roger Cohen, International Herald Tribune, “Why America needs Atomic Anne,” January 23, 2008: “Nuclear power has proved safe in both France and America – not one radiation-related death has occurred in the history of U.S. commercial nuclear power. It constitutes a vital alternative to the greenhouse-gas spewing coal-power plants that account for over 50 percent of U.S. electricity generation.”

GE chief Jeffrey Immelt “GE chief sees growth opportunities in 2008,” USA Today, December 13, 2007: “If you look at the most profitable energy asset in U.S. history, it’s nuclear power plants.”

Bob Geldof, singer, songwriter, actor and co-organizer of Live Aid, “Geldof: ‘Help the Planet … Go Nuclear,” The Guardian, December 12, 2007: “[T]o really help the planet, we have to go nuclear, fast.”

Roy Innis, national chairman of the Congress of Racial Equality, “The truth about “alternative energy,” The American Daily, December 6, 2007: “We need every energy resource: oil, gas, coal, hydroelectric, nuclear – and wind, solar and geothermal.”

Paul Newman, “Value of stars’ views on Indian Point questioned,” Journal News, November 16, 2007: ‘Yesterday, through a third-party e-mail, Newman reiterated his belief in the technology, calling himself a “great advocate of nuclear power.”‘

David Mohler, Duke Energy Chief Technology Officer, “From Coal to Nuclear Plants,” Charlotte Observer, November 14, 2007: “But you can’t completely reduce energy consumption to zero, especially in the face of increasing population. It’s got to come from somewhere. Long term, my belief is if we’re not serious about building more nuclear plants, we’re really fundamentally not serious about attacking climate change.”

David Hawkins, Director, Climate Center, Natural Resources Defense Council, U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Hearing on America’s Climate Security Act of 2007, November 13, 2007: “We have no objection to nuclear power being an active participant in a greenhouse gas protection program.”

Ralph Izzo, president and CEO of PSEG, “What will future hold for energy in New Jersey?” Associated Press, November 12, 2007: “I hope that people recognize that you cannot preserve the quality of life and standard of living that we have just through energy efficiency and renewables. You just cannot make the math work,” said Ralph Izzo, president and CEO of PSEG. “Therefore, I would hope that they would leave nuclear in there (the plan).”

Hal Bozarth, President of the Chemistry Council of New Jersey, “What will future hold for energy in New Jersey?” Associated Press, November 12, 2007: “Unless we increase our generation … we’re going to end up with extraordinarily high energy costs,” Bozarth said. “I’d like to see nuclear, maybe the clean coal (plants) … I don’t think solar and wind are the answer in and of themselves.”

Tom Pelton, Baltimore Sun, “Going nuclear”, November 11, 2007: The real answer to our energy dilemma, some experts say, may be to change our lifestyles and encourage several of the most reliable alternatives to coal. Nuclear power may play an important role in that mix.

Tucker Carlson, MSNBC, November 9, 2007: “Here’s my prediction: in ten years, five years, nuclear power will be an issue endorsed by everybody. We will be the French in five years. What’s striking to me now is we’re on the cusp of this energy crisis, maybe even in one, and nobody is even mentioning.”

Kate O’Beirne, National Review’s Washington Editor, MSNBC: Tucker with Tucker Carlson, November 9, 2007: “Because concern about the environment, including global warming, is bipartisan, when it comes to rank and file people in both parties — because both parties seem to offer very confusing remedies, some of this and a little of this, when nuclear power is right there for us to adopt, anyone serious about eliminating emissions from fossil fuels should be seriously looking at nuclear power.”

Sacha Zimmerman, The New Republic, MSNBC: Tucker with Tucker Carlson, November 9, 2007: “So while I think that the world is going to have to get used to using nuclear power a lot, and we’re going to have to start building reactors all over the place, it`s not going to be the only thing.”

Financial Times, “Act now to avoid an energy crunch,” November 7, 2007: “Energy use must be cut. Investment in nuclear power, however controversial, is essential. To curb greenhouse emissions, a transparent price for carbon is vital, too.”

MSNBC’s Tucker Carlson, November 7, 2007: “Ed, please summarize in one sentence why the Left still opposes nuclear energy (which has never killed a single person and is essentially the cleanest kind of energy that even the French have embraced) Why is the Sierra Club against that again…”

Tom Mast, author of “Over a Barrel: A Simple Guide to the Oil Shortage,” Newsday, November 7, 2007: “To the extent that an automobile runs on electricity, the energy can be generated by virtually any source – including nuclear, which produces no global-warming gases.”

Radio Talk Show Host Ed Schultz, MSNBC’s Tucker Carlson, November 7, 2007: “I am for nuclear power. You’ve got the wrong guy on that one. You’re not going to hook me on that one. I believe it should be part of the package.”

Armando Olivera, president Florida Power & Light, “A reliable source of electricity,” Miami Herald, October 29, 2007: “As a clean-energy company, we’re concerned about greenhouse gas emissions and nuclear energy represents a clean alternative. A nuclear facility produces zero carbon dioxide, a key contributor to global climate change, and gives off no other greenhouse gases. Crist has said that Florida will help lead the effort toward a clean energy future, and we fully support his objectives.”

GreenBiz.com, “Power Industry Needs Big Grid Investments,” October 18, 2007: “Nuclear power plants must also be expanded to strengthen and stabilize future grid operations.”

Lynn Edward Weaver, president emeritus of Florida Institute of Technology, “Conservation and nuclear power are keys to energy future,” Jacksonville Times-Union, October 17, 2007: “We need to make greater use of the one proven technology that can make a real difference in the effort to mitigate global warming – nuclear energy. Safe and reliable, nuclear energy has proved itself for over three decades, in the United States and elsewhere.”

John Hennessy, President of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, “Panel speaks on role of nuclear energy,” Stanford Daily, October 16, 2007: “Perhaps the only viable short-term solution [to reducing emissions] that will reach usable scale quickly will be nuclear power.”

Boston Herald editorial staff, “A boost for nuclear power,” September 30, 2007: “Sticking to the tried and true, as NRG plans to do, is crucial to harvesting nuclear power’s benefits.”

Gulf Power President and CEO Susan Story, “Gulf Power eying alternative and green fuel sources,” NW Florida Daily News, September 10, 2007: “Nuclear may not be a critical option, it may be the only option.” Ross Stein, U.S. Geological Survey, “Restored faith in nuclear power,” Chicago Tribune, August 26, 2007: “Nuclear power is a safer industry, it is a more efficient industry, and it is critical to answering energy demands and protecting the environment. The U.S. can have faith in nuclear power.”

John Hennessy, Stanford University president, Investor’s Business Daily, July 17, 2007: “Nuclear power has to be part of the solution. Can we really understand the notion of risk… Nuclear plants vs. carbon emission- which will kill and has killed more people…”

Forbes, Brian Wingfield, “America’s Next Nukes,” July 3, 2007: “Although nuclear power plants are expensive to build, they are relatively cheap to run and produce virtually no greenhouse gas emissions. With financial incentives on the table and profits for plant owners in sight, the “nuclear renaissance” is upon us.”

Jason Makansi, Lights Out, “Exercising the Nuclear Option”: “If global warming is to be considered an immediate threat to the planet, then the expansion of nuclear power should be considered a national imperative, and resolution to the nuclear waste issue a national emergency.”

Stephen Howe director of the Centre for Space Nuclear Research, a division of America’s Idaho National Laboratory (INL), “NASA Moonbase needs nuclear rockets,” The Register, June 30, 2007: “In the end, it’s fair to say that if the human race is ever going to develop space transport in a serious way we will need to develop something more powerful than chemical rockets to do it with. That means some form of nuclear-powered rocket, unless we’re willing to accept that that it will always take months, years or decades to move between planets in the solar system. Anyone who sees the human race ever achieving a spacefaring civilisation should probably be in favour of nuclear-propelled spaceships.”

Charles E. Bunch chairman of the National Association of Manufacturers, “PPG chief pushes nuclear development”, Pittsburg Tribune-Review, June 27, 2007: “The nation must be able to increase its uses of nuclear power as an energy source.”

Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, World Nuclear News, June 21, 2007: “said that he had never seen a credible scenario for reducing emissions that did not include nuclear energy.”

Gerald Doucet, general secretary of WEC, World Nuclear News, June 21, 2007: “In Doucet’s view, the main ‘nuclear renaissance’ would begin to have a significant impact on global greenhouse gas emissions around 2030. In the meantime, the nuclear industry should look to lifetime extensions to help maintain the nuclear contribution to electricity provision.”

Kurt Yeager, lead author of the WEC’s (World Energy Council) Energy and Climate Change report, Agence France-Presse, June 21, 2007: “If we are going to get through this century we had better assure ourselves that nuclear power is available for our coming generations…The problem will not go away magically in 2050. We will be at a low carbon economy at that time but to sustain that we need to build nuclear.”

Stanford University President John Hennessy, “Nuclear: Dark horse energy alternative,” Oakland Tribune, June 18, 2007: “Nuclear power has to be part of the solution… Can we really understand the notion of risk… Nuclear plants versus carbon emissions — which will kill and has killed more people…”

California Environmental Protection Agency’s Dan Skopec “Nuclear: Dark horse energy alternative,” Oakland Tribune, June 18, 2007: “We need to have a debate on nuclear.”

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Peter Darbee of PG&E Corp., “Nuclear: Dark horse energy alternative,” Oakland Tribune, June 18, 2007: “We need all of the options to meet this huge challenge and, therefore, nuclear ought to be on the table.”

Nobel Prize winner Steven Chu, director of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, “Nuclear: Dark horse energy alternative,” Oakland Tribune, June 18, 2007: “He reasons that despite the fears and concerns about the energy source, nuclear power must be considered because it does not produce greenhouse gas during generation. Anything, he said, would be better than carbon-spewing coal plants.”

Dr. Burton Richter, winner of the 1976 Nobel Prize in physics, “Nobel prize winner debates future of nuclear power,” Mongabay.com, June 7, 2007: “Dr. Burton Richter, winner of the 1976 Nobel Prize in physics, said that nuclear would play an important part of the future energy portfolio needed to cut carbon emissions to fight global warming.”

Statement from Environmental Defense, “Virginia’s Nuclear Future,” Washington Post, June 3, 2007: “The problem of global warming is so serious that we must thoroughly consider every low-carbon option for generating power,” says a, a green group that remains concerned about the security of nuclear plants but calls the industry’s safety record “impressive.”

Scott Howson, Chairman of the Rappahannock Group of the Sierra Club, “Mixed Greens: How the New Nuclear Splits Environmentalists,” June 4, 2007: “But speaking just for myself, I see a solution ultimately in nuclear energy. It’s non-polluting, and that’s what we’re all looking for.”

North Texas oil-industry icon T. Boone Pickens, June 1, 2007: “Fuel of the future of course is going to be nuclear power. Got to have it; got to use it. It’s clean. There have been no accidents with it, and you can get rid of the waste.”

Bill Chameides, Chief scientist for Environmental Defense, May 26, 2007: “Nuclear power has operated fairly safely in the United States…Climate change is the defining environmental issue of this generation, and it’s disingenuous to take nuclear off the table.”

Lee Iacocca, Former CEO of Chrysler, “Where have all the leaders gone?”: “I’d consider restoring the nuclear option. I’d push for a reactivation of nuclear power as a viable option. It’s time to stop running scared from Chernobyl and start realizing that we now have the systems and technology to build fail-safe nuclear power plants….The United States is lagging far behind in nuclear energy, when we should be on the leading edge…

“Of course, you can’t fuel a car with nuclear energy, but you can run a car on electricity generated by nuclear power. In December 2006, I attended the Alternative Energy Show in Los Angeles, and the big news for cars was plug-in hybrids. They are being touted as the wave of the future, and I agree. That will happen much faster if we restore our investment in nuclear power.”

“Paul Newman Endorses NY Nuclear Plant”, Associated Press, May 24, 2007: “What I saw exceeded my expectations,” Newman said in the statement. “No Army or Navy base I’ve ever visited has been more armored, and I couldn’t walk 30 feet inside the plant without swiping my key card to go through another security checkpoint.”

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report, May 4, 2007: “For lower stabilization levels, scenarios put more emphasis on the use of low-carbon energy sources, such as renewable energy and nuclear power, and the use of CO2 capture and storage (CCS)”

William K. Reilly, former Environmental Protection Agency administrator, North County Times, April 21, 2007: “I think it definitely has a future,” Reilly said, adding that nuclear plants have the potential to supply large amounts of power to the country while sharply reducing utilities’ emissions of greenhouse gases.

Garrett Boone, Trammell S. Crow and David Litman co-chairs of Texas Business for Clean Air, March 30, 2007: “We support nuclear power as a clean, safe alternative for generating base load power.”

Former New York City mayor and current Republican presidential, Rudy Giuliani, March 29, 2007: “We’re going to have to find a way to expand nuclear power, because it’s one of the ways in which we can give ourselves (energy) independence and also not have it impact on the environment, on pollution, global warming.”

Wall Street Journal, William Tucker author of “Terrestrial Energy: How a Nuclear-Solar Alliance Can Rescue the Planet,” March 28, 2007: The public is now coming around. Seventy percent now consider nuclear plants acceptable, meaning new plants will probably not become bogged down in endless court delays.”

Judi Greenwald, Director of innovative solutions with the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, March 23, 2007: “You can’t just write nuclear off… I think everybody feels you have to at least look again.”

USA Today, William M. Welch, March 23, 2007: “With global warming a rising concern, some environmentalists are rethinking nuclear power because it emits zero greenhouse gases.”

Bill Chameides, Chief scientist for Environmental Defense, March 23, 2007: “Global warming is the environmental issue of our generation. Clearly to solve this problem we need to have all technologies on the table. Therefore, nuclear energy … needs to be considered.”

Wall Street Journal, Geoffrey Norman, March 9, 2007: “If the planet has 10 years to get its act together — as some of the more messianic prophets of doom-by-global-warming are saying — then it seems almost suicidal to close down a source of electricity that produces virtually no greenhouse gases, just for the sake of false piety. A truly “bold,” environmentally conscious state would go nuclear even more. Burlington will only really be the “best of” Green Places when local postcards show its charming leafy streets, with a view of Lake Champlain — and a nuclear power plant looming in the background.”

The Weekly Standard, Ernest W. Lefever editor of The Apolcalyptic Premise, founding president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center where he is a senior fellow, March 7, 2007: “Nuclear power plants are clean. They throw no pollutants into the air, in contrast to coal plants that produce large quantities of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides. America faces a grave energy crisis and our demand for electricity will increase 50 percent by 2025. Since we cannot depend on foreign oil, and since clean power is insufficient, we should consider constructing new nuclear energy plants that are safe, efficient, clean.”

“An Early Environmentalist, Embracing New ‘Heresies’,” New York Times, February 27, 2007: ”There were legitimate reasons to worry about nuclear power, but now that we know about the threat of climate change, we have to put the risks in perspective,” he says. ”Sure, nuclear waste is a problem, but the great thing about it is you know where it is and you can guard it.”

Bob Beckel, Liberal Democratic Strategist, February 22, 2007: “Nuclear technology has advanced and is safer. So yes, it’s time we build more nuclear power plants. The government needs to mandate higher fuel standards, which the president has authority to do now.”

Forrest J. Remick, Professor Emeritus of Nuclear Engineering. February 22, 2007: “Nuclear plants are very safe…It helps to compare their safety record with that of other major industries. No member of the public has been killed or injured from radiation during the nearly 50 years that commercial nuclear power plants have been operating in the U.S.”

John Hutson chaired the Fresno Utilities Commission and M. Aslam Lone, Ph.D., of Fresno, consultant in nuclear and radiation physics, February 18, 2007: “Nuclear provides benefits as a hedge against gas prices and greenhouse gases from alternate fuels. Availability and location of renewable sources are at nature’s mercy. Fossil/nuclear can be built anywhere and operated on demand. Thus, nuclear is the only viable option to reduce California’s dependence on natural gas and reduce greenhouse gases.”

James Beaubien, President of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 17 and Mayor of Gibraltar, MI, December 12, 2006: “Renewed development of nuclear energy is a clean and safe approach to address the current and future demands on our electricity supply and help us maintain a strong economy.”

Melissa Trustman, Detroit Regional Chamber of Commerce. CASEnergy Coalition launch November 10, 2006: “With Michigan and this county’s electricity needs continuing to rise, we need continued electricity growth here and across the US. Because a strong US economy helps to ensure a strong Michigan economy. Nuclear energy is one of the ways we can meet our energy challenges.”

John Engler, President of the National Association of Manufacturers, three-term governor of Michigan, May 31, 2006: “Locally, nuclear energy boosts economic growth and supports high-paying jobs. Every dollar spent by a plant generates about $1.13 in the local economy.”

Christopher Guith, Vice President of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Institute for 21st Century Energy, on nuclear energy, May 27, 2009: “As an emissions-free, reliable technology, nuclear energy will continue to play a key role in addressing climate change concerns and meeting demand with affordable and reliable electricity.”