What do you think?
Rate this book
The Answer: Why Only Inherently Safe, Mini Nuclear Power Plants Can Save Our World
A bold and uncompromising argument in support of a technology that can end our dependence on fossil fuels now . Reese Palley argues that wind, solar, and hydroelectric power―all of which have large CO2-emitting footprints―are not the answer needed to make meaningful changes in our disastrous warming trend. Nor, for both economic and political reasons, can large nuclear power plants be built in time.
The usual response to looming disaster is to throw ever-larger bulwarks into the mix, but the central theme of this book argues that we can only respond fast enough by radically reducing the scale of nuclear plants. The only sensible answer, which the author backs up with exhaustive research, is the construction and deployment of container-sized nuclear generators distributed throughout the world, producing clean energy at the local level, getting us off the worst of our fossil-fuel gluttony within a decade. 30 black-and-white photographs
The usual response to looming disaster is to throw ever-larger bulwarks into the mix, but the central theme of this book argues that we can only respond fast enough by radically reducing the scale of nuclear plants. The only sensible answer, which the author backs up with exhaustive research, is the construction and deployment of container-sized nuclear generators distributed throughout the world, producing clean energy at the local level, getting us off the worst of our fossil-fuel gluttony within a decade. 30 black-and-white photographs
304 pages, Hardcover
First published October 5, 2011
7 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
February 5, 2013
I would have to added this book to my "did not finish bookshelf" if not for my strong belief that nuclear energy needs to be a much larger part of our world's energy future. Unfortunately this author makes this important subject a very difficult read. Even the order of the topics discussed (in excrutiating detail) cause confusion on the key point he is trying to make. He over emphasizes the terrible and horrendous impact that all other energy resources have on our environment and society before he gets to his key message on "safe, mini nuclear power plants".
In my view he clearly overstates the negatives of the other energy options as the one energy option that I know quite well is represented very inaccurately. When he does finally get into some details of the mini nuclear power plants (half way through the book), he glosses over the downside like they do not exist.
The writing and editing was a bit sloppy even on his main subject:
1. Title - "...Safe, Mini, Nuclear Power Plants..."
2. Switches to an acronym of SMR which is defined as "small, medium reactors" at the beginning of the book.
3. Index at the end of the book defines SMR as "small, mobile reactors"
A much better read is "Power to Save the World: The Truth about Nuclear Energy" by Gwyneth Cravens and Richard Rhodes. Well written and makes a compelling, logical argument on nuclear energy.
In my view he clearly overstates the negatives of the other energy options as the one energy option that I know quite well is represented very inaccurately. When he does finally get into some details of the mini nuclear power plants (half way through the book), he glosses over the downside like they do not exist.
The writing and editing was a bit sloppy even on his main subject:
1. Title - "...Safe, Mini, Nuclear Power Plants..."
2. Switches to an acronym of SMR which is defined as "small, medium reactors" at the beginning of the book.
3. Index at the end of the book defines SMR as "small, mobile reactors"
A much better read is "Power to Save the World: The Truth about Nuclear Energy" by Gwyneth Cravens and Richard Rhodes. Well written and makes a compelling, logical argument on nuclear energy.
December 18, 2025
The overall information contained in the text is 5 star worthy. The history of incentives with breeder reactors needed for producing nukes (the source of the heebie-jeebies) as well as the key Naval Officer who sheparded the mobile nuke drive for subs and aircraft carriers but also created the technological lock in for the added complexity of modern power plant systems that lead to Chernobyl and 3-Mile Island (both issues have solutions with the new proposed SMR designs with waste being a near negligible issue).
Much of the book is spent on global warming which might have been better at the end since a more conservative audience would have benefited from the Patriotic history, naval tales, national security issues (the Carrington effect solution is interesting), the safety and future economic benefits of the new designs, and then moved into conservation which shares root with a more cautious tone (environment, wealth, social policy, etc).
The history of US nuclear policy contrasted with France, the incapacitaty of the NRC to approve SMR standardized designs for rapid mass production and export of some models (the airplane industry is a great analogy in the text pp. 167), the cost advantages and decentralized grid with reduced losses, and the numbers and fiscal policy to quickly bring the improved system online is wonderful back of the envelope birds eye view.
That said, if it weren't for the sailiance of requiring a massive clean, cheap KW-per-hour, smart grid build out (a key knotch in the tech that would unlock vertical farming, cellular agriculture, electronic vehicles, desalination, hydrolysis, more robotics, and a host of other abilities made unaffordable by energy costs) it would be a little less in stars. the beginning of the text has a highly cynical, bordering on nihilistic tone with words like 'eaters' or humanity as a virus... such language destroys trust regardless of the frustration felt in trying to avoid a potential a massive catastrophe (the Russian roulette metaphor with statistics is app and it's not a conservative gamble). The dehuminzation fades and the different ordering of topics would have been nice to reach the minds who would benefit from it the most. Solar and grid batteries are given a raw deal (though even now they'll require a smart grid to function and cyber security is an issue either way) since they've progressed pretty well since 2010... but carbon emissions haven't followed the change his plan would imply.
There's only one typo I noticed and that is on page 165 with a cost comparison 500 single Gigawatt plants and the 10% loss from energy loss in having the plants spaced out so far. The figure given is 4,000 SMRs at 100 megawatts each... I think the calculation is fixed on page 172 "higher end...need 4,500" (most likely from the listed models varying above 100 MW but I like the way he lists his calculatotions to ballpark other aspects of the proposal).
It'd be nice to see solar and battery tech coming online in parallel due to their low kW/hour costs and falling... as well as a market grid that would allow the battery owners to buy low in over supply and sell high in shortages to earn a return and smooth the grid... perhaps President Trump could have reworked some of the problematic areas and renamed it out of spite while still helping red states with jobs, improving energy security, lowering a key input in most everything to reduce inflation, and saving the environment as a side benefit. But the progress on nuclear by the 2024 admin is a silver lining so long as clean mining practices follow the new safe designs. One way or another.
Much of the book is spent on global warming which might have been better at the end since a more conservative audience would have benefited from the Patriotic history, naval tales, national security issues (the Carrington effect solution is interesting), the safety and future economic benefits of the new designs, and then moved into conservation which shares root with a more cautious tone (environment, wealth, social policy, etc).
The history of US nuclear policy contrasted with France, the incapacitaty of the NRC to approve SMR standardized designs for rapid mass production and export of some models (the airplane industry is a great analogy in the text pp. 167), the cost advantages and decentralized grid with reduced losses, and the numbers and fiscal policy to quickly bring the improved system online is wonderful back of the envelope birds eye view.
That said, if it weren't for the sailiance of requiring a massive clean, cheap KW-per-hour, smart grid build out (a key knotch in the tech that would unlock vertical farming, cellular agriculture, electronic vehicles, desalination, hydrolysis, more robotics, and a host of other abilities made unaffordable by energy costs) it would be a little less in stars. the beginning of the text has a highly cynical, bordering on nihilistic tone with words like 'eaters' or humanity as a virus... such language destroys trust regardless of the frustration felt in trying to avoid a potential a massive catastrophe (the Russian roulette metaphor with statistics is app and it's not a conservative gamble). The dehuminzation fades and the different ordering of topics would have been nice to reach the minds who would benefit from it the most. Solar and grid batteries are given a raw deal (though even now they'll require a smart grid to function and cyber security is an issue either way) since they've progressed pretty well since 2010... but carbon emissions haven't followed the change his plan would imply.
There's only one typo I noticed and that is on page 165 with a cost comparison 500 single Gigawatt plants and the 10% loss from energy loss in having the plants spaced out so far. The figure given is 4,000 SMRs at 100 megawatts each... I think the calculation is fixed on page 172 "higher end...need 4,500" (most likely from the listed models varying above 100 MW but I like the way he lists his calculatotions to ballpark other aspects of the proposal).
It'd be nice to see solar and battery tech coming online in parallel due to their low kW/hour costs and falling... as well as a market grid that would allow the battery owners to buy low in over supply and sell high in shortages to earn a return and smooth the grid... perhaps President Trump could have reworked some of the problematic areas and renamed it out of spite while still helping red states with jobs, improving energy security, lowering a key input in most everything to reduce inflation, and saving the environment as a side benefit. But the progress on nuclear by the 2024 admin is a silver lining so long as clean mining practices follow the new safe designs. One way or another.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 23, 2016
No matter how much I may agree with the author, the pretentious and, at times, downright condescending and dismissive attitude makes this a work hard to slog through.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews