French president Nicolas Sarkozy Thursday promised a "new industrial revolution" fueled by nuclear power. The rhetoric is no doubt a little overheated, but reflects the French recognition that fossil fuels are not the future:

France — the country most reliant on nuclear power — has been constructing its first European Pressurized Reactor, or EPR, on the Normandy coast, and it is expected to go into service in 2012.

EPR reactors are meant eventually to replace the aging reactors around the world whose designs date from decades ago. The Normandy site is one of only two EPRs in the world currently under construction; the other is in Finland.

France is an interesting case as the world's most nuclear-power dependent country. Lacking ample coal or natural gas deposits, it really has no choice other than nukes to generate lots of electricity.

Here in the U.S., we've gone the natural gas-coal route because we have lots of both, which makes nuclear power a less attractive option economically right now. That will change if we impose some sort of carbon tax or cap-and-trade mechanism to put a price on carbon emissions.

What do you think? Should the United States do what France is doing and expand its nuclear power production capability?

( Comment to ABQjournal.com   -   Rating: 0/5(0)   -   )

With $4 gasoline, people are thinking seriously about their commute, and whether it makes sense to move closer to work. To help you do the math, the wonderful Ironman has build a new web-based tool. Plug in the pertinent numbers - price of gas, length of commute, etc. - and you'll find out the cost of staying where you are compared with getting a place in town.

(h/t James Hamilton)

( Comment to ABQjournal.com   -   Rating: 0/5(0)   -   )

Scientists and Engineers for America, an organization pushing to include scientific issues in this fall's election discussion, has launched a web site that allows you to check on the science-related positions of the federal elected officials and candidates in your area.

SEA published a poll this week suggesting that voters say science is important to them. I've a bit of a quibble with the way the poll question was worded:

On a scale that goes from 0 to 10, where 0 is not at all important and 10 is extremely important, how important do you think it is that America makes public policy decisions that are based on science and technology to solve problems we face today, like global warming, energy, public education, and health care?

The obvious answer is yes, but the devil here is in the details. People whose political views lead them to positions that lie outside the scientific mainstream do see themselves as rejecting science. They instead tend to  seek out minority scientific views, outside the mainstream, that support their political views. So I don't think you should make too much of the poll result. But the underlying effort to include science in the political dialogue is refreshing.

As the fall campaign warms up, we'll get back to you with stories discussing New Mexico candidates' responses to the SEA. 

( Comment to ABQjournal.com   -   Rating: 0/5(0)   -   )

As this morning's story noted, the summer rains are starting, and this week's drought monitor notes that we can start to see the results:

Texas and New Mexico:  This was one of the few areas of dryness and drought that received substantial, drought-easing precipitation last week, though there were a few notable exceptions. Anywhere from 1 to several inches of precipitation induced 1-classification improvements for sizeable portions of Texas and eastern New Mexico. Amounts were quite heavy in a few isolated areas, most notably across inland areas near the far southeastern Texas coast, and at a few sites along the Rio Grande River in and near Val Verde County. In most areas, however, precipitation totals were less impressive (between 0.5 and 2.0 inches), and most of south-central and far southern Texas recorded little or no rainfall.

 The map still looks a bit grim, though:

( Comment to ABQjournal.com   -   Rating: 0/5(0)   -   )