Great article on windblogs on the European Supergrid study made by the University of Kassel. It starts with the sentence:
In a world of brown energy, there is a vision of a green energy future
Now, since nuclear energy is never mentioned in the article, I assume that it is part of the brown energy, so the question is: what does “brown” mean? If it means everything that comes from down under our feet, then geothermal is brown too. If it means polluting the air, then nuclear is definitely green.
So “brown” must mean something like crappy. If so, it’s a judgment, not a scientific fact.
Define “brown”.
none
AREVA is a particular company in many respects, but the most important is probably that we are in the eye of the cyclone with respect to communication issues. We cannot communicate through press releases like many companies, because everything we do is highly tied to international energy policies, and immediately raises concerns. We must learn to enter the public debate and use modern social media for this.
Knowkers.org, a group of social activists concerned about manipulation on the web and absence of debate on some of the most crucial issues faced by our planet, published an article one month ago about the different perceptions of AREVA’s investment in Imouraren, Niger. It argues that AREVA is probably underestimating the need to enter into an ongoing debate with the people of Niger through the social media they are using.
Le traitement de cette information à travers les trois fenêtres retenues pour l’analyse (communique de presse d’Areva, le quotidien nigérian Le Républicain, et le blog du MNJ) montre en effet une vision toute relative aux positions de chacun. Alors que le MNJ menace dors et déjà d’agir et faire fi des négociations de paix menée par la Libye, le Républicain parle d’une grande fête nationale, ou la liesse fut au rendez vous. Le communiqué d’Areva quant à lui est très sobre, factuel, tentant une neutralité presque choquante au regard de l’importance de l’événement pour le groupe.
The fact that AREVA Inc. in the US has launched an excellent blog three months ago gives us good hope that we are indeed going to take this challenge.
[thanks Marc]
none
“Why another blog defending nuclear energy?” one of my friends asked me recently.
Well, I just believe that the debate around those issues, at least in this country, is most often childish and irresponsible. The pros and the cons present two conflicting ideologies and fire arguments at each other, sometimes downright heinous on one side and commiserating on the other. Both refuse to engage into any form of debate around the real issues of feasibility, which are of course driven by the technology we have in our hands, but perhaps more importantly numbers. For example, if we want to reduce the share of nuclear energy to 50% in France without increasing CO2 emissions, it means, according to Jean-Marc Jancovici that we must reduce electricity consumption by half. Now are we prepared to do this? On the other side, we keep on claiming that nuclear energy is free from CO2 emissions, which is by and large true, but we never mention that because nuclear power plants heat rivers, our ecological footprint is far from negligible.
So the debate is difficult, and let’s just say that I’d like to contribute, and give my two cents worth once in a while.
none