Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Saturday, April 17, 2010 | 2:01 a.m.
The would-be assemblyman founded the U.S. Nuclear Energy Foundation to promote the proliferation of nuclear power plants. He travels across the West to spread his message.
Sun coverage
Related Archives
- Yucca Mountain dump opponents see their momentum ebb (4-13-2010)
- Group calls on Congress to keep Yucca Mountain alive (3-22-2010)
- Yucca Mountain foes hail historic step to kill nuclear waste depository (3-4-2010)
- Energy Department withdraws application for Yucca Mountain (3-3-2010)
- In Nevada, nuclear raises touchy issues (11-14-2009)
Many Nevadans are passionate about nuclear energy.
The state’s population overwhelmingly opposes the planned nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain.
But hundreds of miles north of the mountain, up in the meadows of Sparks, is a man dedicated to changing Nevadans’ thinking on nuclear energy.
Gary Duarte is more than a cheerleader for nuclear energy. He’s its proselytizer.
As the founder of the U.S. Nuclear Energy Foundation, a small pronuclear nonprofit organization, he has traveled to Elks lodges and chambers of commerce in small towns across the West preaching the benefits of nuclear energy. Now, he’s also running on the Republican ticket for the Assembly seat in Washoe County District 31, which will open up when Democrat Bernie Anderson is term-limited out at the end of this year.
Duarte, a 63-year-old retired publishing entrepreneur, wants to see nuclear power plants built in Nevada.
“All of our group’s directive and mission is based around common sense, logic and deductive reasoning,” Duarte says. “This is the best option for our country’s future. It won’t pollute the air, it can help break our dependence on foreign oil, and it can provide the energy that’s going to be needed to keep this country progressing.”
As far as the deadly nuclear waste that reactors generate, Duarte says the country is just going to have to recycle it like the rest of the developed world.
“It’s the only logical way to deal with it,” he says.
Nuclear experts and researchers say Nevada may not have a suitable site for nuclear reprocessing, however, because it lacks water. And on top of that, reprocessing is still far too expensive to be undertaken without heavy government subsidies.
Duarte contends that Nevadans are just confused by the highfalutin talk of anti-Yucca Mountain lobbyists, nuclear watchdog groups and industry representatives. He says they talk people in circles and scare them unnecessarily.
That’s one reason you’ll find no nuclear physicists among the group’s ranks. In fact, none of the members of his organization has any experience with nuclear power at all — no scientists, no nuclear technicians, not even an electrician are to be found among the half dozen members.
They’re usually not eyed as shills for the industry because they’re not funded by the industry, Duarte says. They pay for most of their travel expenses out of their own pockets. For most, this is a retirement hobby, an alternative to refinishing antiques or taking up golf.
“I think part of the reason why we have a pretty good dialogue with citizens is because we’re not nuclear experts,” Duarte says. “We’ve done some research, we accumulate information from the (U.S.) Department of Energy and the power companies and nuclear manufacturers, and then we try to relate that data in a method the average person can understand. We think there’s a communication gap between the science and Joe Citizen. We’re trying to fill it.”
It’s that kind of statement that makes Duarte a headache for anti-nuclear activists.
Nuclear energy is an extremely complicated subject, and they fear he may be oversimplifying and whitewashing an industry that can be deadly for neighbors.
They point to major disasters like the explosion in April 1986 in Chernobyl, the 1979 Three Mile Island accident in which a Pennsylvania reactor experienced a partial core meltdown, and the recent headlines from Vermont, where a nuclear reactor was found to have leaked radioactive waste into the soil and water table. About 20 aging U.S. reactors are dealing with underground leaks similar to those in the Vermont plant.
None of that is keeping Duarte and members of his group from traveling the West riling up economically devastated small towns, convincing at least some that nuclear energy might be a savior for their communities. For example, he is the man behind Ely’s recent interest in hosting a nuclear power plant.
Most cities Duarte visits haven’t got a proton-sized chance of getting a nuclear plant. A nuclear reactor needs a market for the electricity, adequate transmission lines and a water supply of tens of thousands of gallons a day. Most cities to which Duarte has carried his “go nuke” message can’t fulfill those requirements.
This is somewhat annoying for nuclear power plant developers, who are flooded with calls from small-town business and civic leaders almost every time Duarte makes a pitch stop.
Sometimes they do produce a possible lead, however, says Mike McGough, a senior vice president of UniStar Nuclear Energy, a nuclear developer that has expressed interest in building a plant in Ely if the town can come up with the water the plant would need. “A lot of these towns that were slated for coal plants are now coming to nuclear,” McGough says. “Some of them are a perfect fit for nuclear power. They’ve got the (market for the electricity), they’ve got water and they’ve got public support.”
Groups like Duarte’s are handy with the public support, McGough says.
Stephanie Tavares claims "state's population overwhelmingly opposes... Yucca"
-------------------------
We live in a town where a real runaway toxic tanker could have derailed and killed 90,000 people.
And nobody cares not even Harry Reid.
In the years since no changes have been made
So it is with Yucca while Reid has made a political run on it - it really is not a safety issue.
Harry and Stephanie and We know this.
But Stephanie continues the fearmongering on behalf of Harry Reid by saying "Nuclear energy is an extremely complicated subject, and they fear he may be oversimplifying and whitewashing an industry that can be deadly for neighbors."
Get over it
Go fix someting important like toxic ladened rail cars
"Duarte contends that Nevadans are just confused by the highfalutin talk of anti-Yucca Mountain lobbyists, nuclear watchdog groups and industry representatives. He says they talk people in circles and scare them unnecessarily."
This is hilarious. Another feeble attempt to try to put Yucca Mountain back on the table by getting someone that is supposedly a "regular guy" without a political agenda.
We have yet another Republican takes a step forward as a proponent for Yucca Mountain. But what's interesting about this guy is that he's taking an end around way of somehow linking nuclear power plants in Nevada with Yucca Mountain and reprocessing nuclear waste. None of these ideas have anything to do with anything. And it just skirts the issue, trying to come at it another way in order to get it to happen. The Republican Party will do anything and everything to try to get Yucca Mountain going again.
This guy can dream all he wants about it, but the fact is that Yucca Mountain is dead. And this pipedream of reprocessing nuclear waste in a desert just 90 miles away from a large city of 2 million people that makes its money off of tourism and gambling is not going to happen.
Nuclear power plants built in Nevada are one thing, but linking it with Yucca Mountain to store the nuclear waste they produce is not the only goal this guy is trying to accomplish. What he is not saying is that what will happen is that it will end up not only storing that new power plant's nuclear waste, but link it to ALL nationally produced nuclear waste (and perhaps even international). This is a commendable effort, but it is transparent and we can all see through it. And it's not going to work.
Just another right wing nut position of deflection to take advantage of Nevada and its people. Yet again. Yucca Mountain is dead as a national nuclear waste toilet receptacle. We won't have it. And we will never have it. Nevada does not and will not and will never be synonymous with nuclear waste.
Lawsuits can be made from here to kingdom come, with piles of paper generated that reaches from here to around the world, and it won't amount to anything except wasted effort, time and money. Nevada killed this Yucca Mountain idea. And it will stay dead forever.
"The state's population overwhelmingly opposes the ObamaCare."
The Sun will never put that into an article but the poll numbers are very similar to the nuclear Yucca issue.
Go to Lake Las Vegas (if you can find anyone there) they have water, are near the power grid and have security.
Just another old man trying to sell snake oil to the ignorant!! Nevadans are simply NOT that stupid, Duarte.
a nuclear accident is the only thing that could take las vegas down,i'm not willing to risk that and anybody who works or owns a business here shouldnt either
Apparently there are a few people living in Nevada with brains located in the right part of their anatomy. Ignorance drives fear and there are a lot of ignorant people living in Nevada that know little to nothing about Nuclear but are scared to hell and back about it.
Energy, everyone needs it and uses it. It has to come from somewhere and most don't even bother to think about the source. Wind, solar and geothermal energy production is the wisest choice but not reliable now or anytime in the near future and still requires water just as all energy production does. Nuclear needs to be a part of the energy mix.
Nevada has a stagnant economy now and other than tourism just doesn't seem to have the economic engine to attract the manufacturing and high tech jobs necessary for a flourishing state. Why not start a nuclear industry. The federal government has used Nevada for decades for research and storage. The fact that Yucca Mountain is 90 miles from Vegas seems to bother some because of location and complain about proximity. Interesting to note that opponents of nuclear do not remember that most of the ground a short distance north was used for above ground bomb explosions. If residents and tourists were truly worried about nuclear contamination then Vegas would have been a ghost town years ago. That fact doesn't seem to come into play.
Seems to me that if the federal government wants to store the used fuel safely then maybe we should start to embrace the idea for economic issues. Managed correctly, Nevada has the opportunity to move into the 22nd century and become the world leader in nuclear technology if we just look forward. We as a country might be able to be leaders in reprocessing technology and find in the future that Nevada is the new Saudi for energy production.
Lets face facts, nuclear energy production will always be part of our worlds energy future. You can either find a way to embrace it or continue to live in the dark.
By the way I live in Nevada.
I agree with you, fosimmons. Let's send this crap to Texas.
But later, when Texas secedes from the Union, we'll have another problem on our hands.... All the nuclear waste will be in a foreign country..... And the U.S. Republicans will scream and rant and rave and call to arms to nuke them into oblivion before the Democratic Independent Republic of Texas (now known by the abbreviation DIRT) turns it into weapons of mass destruction.....
fosimmons says "Risk is a subjective issue. It only takes one big mess up and there goes all the folks who come to Las Vegas."
Is that what Harry said to Obama after Obama told people not to come to Las Vegas
Interesting comments, some are even related to the topic at hand. People in southern Nevada are already dying from the effects of radiation in their bodies. Several wise public health voices have observed that lung cancer from smoking is largely caused by the massive amounts of polonium-210 in the epithelium of smokers (first-hand or second-hand). Polonium-210, if you recall, was used by one (rogue) Russian spy to kill another Russian spy a few years ago.
If there is a clear and present danger from radiation in Las Vegas, it is not coming from any government-run facilities, nor would it come from a nuclear power plant if one were here. It comes from using tobacco, which is fertilized with phosphate fertilizer that has a sizable uranium content, and polonium-210 is a natural daughter isotope of the disintegration of naturally occuring uranium.
Google it, you will be as amazed as I was.
So, until local industries show they really care about the health of their customers and forbid smoking in their wonderful and awe-inspiring establishments, I would not take their concerns about some 90-mile-distant radioactive material disposal program damaging their image too seriously.
There are red flag exercises occuring in southern Nevada this week. I demand that this stop. Military jets do crash and I would hate one crashing in a neighborhood and killing innocent people just like
nuke u lar waste can. It's not worth the risk.
There are government workers in downtown Las Vegas using pencil sharpeners, staplers and hole punchers.
Somebody has got to stop that before somebody gets kill by a flying peice of metal or wood or piece of paper.
I am about as ardent an environmentalist as they come and I support responsible construction of new generation nuclear power plants. It is true as pointed out above that this would be a good thing for Nevada. Other good things would be a massive facility for solar or wind or purification of ocean water. All of these are doable and would provide industry and high paying professional jobs. However what is missing from the equation is Nevada leadership with an ear toward science and the ability of action. Badly needed perhaps is a progressive disconnect from the current industry that seems to offer less promise for the future and people of Nevada than any other potential option.
Im not going to even read this article, however the Federal Government has over 38 BILLION, I SAID BILLION DOLLARS invested in Yucca Mtn. You might as well finish the god damn thing! Build the dump and charge other states for storing their nuclear waste in our state...even though its federal!
YUCCA IS DEAD.
amazing how you people are afraid of storing and transporting SPENT fuel rods but say nothing about transporting and storing the active ones! If its safe to move the HOT fuel in these containers, why wouldn't it be safe for low energy ones? We need power and nuclear is the way to go. Harry's to busy selling out to the greenies to help. He already shut down building 2 new coal plants.
Hey beev......
Send that nuclear waste to Texas or Arizona.
If it's so safe, why doesn't John Maccain
want it. He said, no way.
beever, spent fuel is much hotter, thermally and radioactively, than fresh fuel heading for a reactor. Little shielding is required for fresh fuel, but once it has taken part in sustaining criticality in a reactor, it becomes loaded with fission products which put out a lot of heat and penetrating radiation. That is why it spends a mandatory few years under water in a spent fuel pool after it comes out of the reactor, before it can be taken to dry storage or moved by truck or train in heavily shielded containers.
If it is so hot, why is it spent? Because it is no longer rich enough in fissile isotopes to contribute to sustaining the critical state of the reactor.
There have been many proposals to use spent fuel to generate electricity using just its heat and something more volatile than water, like an alcohol maybe, that would flash into vapor and drive a turbine. But compared to the efficiency of a nuclear reactor there just is not the economy of scale to make that sort of thing pay. Plus you do not want individual or bundled spent fuel assemblies in lots of additional places, it would be a security nightmare.
The whole world (of nuclear nations) moves spent fuel around, either to other reactors for storage, to centralized storage facilities, or to reprocessing centers. There have been traffic fatalities but never a serious radioactive release from a transport accident. Europe and Asia move more spent fuel than we do in the US, but a few years ago the National Academy of Sciences published a book suggesting it can be safely shipped in the US as well. The US regulations on shipping spent fuel adopt the international requirements published by the IAEA.
The fear that is reflected in some of the comments on this transportation aspect of the nuclear fuel cycle is unfounded, it has no factual basis. But it is fun to come up with a really scary "what if" scenario based on extremely unlikely events. Disasters involving nuclear materials make for entertaining novels and movies, and even make for well written mixed fact/fantasy books pretending to be non-fiction.
Anyone remember the "Mobile Chernobyl" propaganda campaign from a few years back? It is a case in point. Several Nevada lawmakers were actually going around the country to scare people living in transportation hubs into opposing Yucca Mountain by dramatizing this deadly explosive specter as one that could actually happen. We heard it was a call from a Nobel laureate to one of these lawmakers that put a stop to this campaign's slogan. It simply cannot happen, it is impossible. So muchy for trusting your elected leaders. Do your homework. Don't trust me either. Do your homework, and use sources that do not have an ax to grind when it comes to Yucca Mountain, one way or the other. The National Academy of Sciences will let you read their books online (hint).
WOXOF is incorrect in his statement that the government has invested $38 billion in Yucca. Depending on how you categorize some of the expenditures, about $9 billion has been spent.
He/she is closer if the statement was that $31 billion in fees and interest have gone into the Nuclear Waste Fund, but besides $7 billion included in the $9 billion spent on Yucca, that does not mean $24 billion is sitting waiting to be spent. Instead, Congress has "borrowed" that amount and left behind a series of IOU's that future Congress (uh-huh, wink-wink) will pay back when we get a new disposal facility.
I think we should be looking at Thorium reactors. Harry Reid agrees.
http://www.wired.com/magazine/2009/12/ff...