Via the GWPF – After Tsunami Disaster, Expect Nuclear Delays & Global Run On Cheap Fossil Fuels
Forget wind. Forget solar. Forget green energy. Japan’s nuclear disaster will only intensify the global race for cheap fossil fuels while most future energy R&D will go into nuclear safety. –Benny Peiser, 14 March 2011
Any potential switch away from nuclear power is likely to favour gas-fired generation, the most practical low carbon-emission alternative. –David Musiker, – Reuters, 14 March 2011
Nuclear power should have a part to play in cutting carbon emissions. But safety fears could kill its revival – at least in the west. Although support for new nuclear construction has been creeping up in the US and Europe, it remains brittle. Even one serious accident could shatter it. –Financial Times, 14 March 2011
Germany’s federal government intends to check the operating time of each of the 17 German nuclear power plants. The question of coal energy is newly emerging. –Die Welt, 14 March 2011
Cost remains the biggest obstacle for any revival of nuclear energy. Momentum for a nuclear comeback also has been slowed because other energy sources remain less expensive. Natural gas is cheap, especially with the expansion of supplies from shale rock, and there’s been no legislative action to tax carbon emissions. — Jia Lynn Yang, The Washington Post, 13 March 2011
Former President Bill Clinton said Friday that delays in offshore oil and gas drilling permits are “ridiculous” at a time when the economy is still rebuilding, according to attendees at the IHS CERAWeek conference. –Darren Goode, Politico, 11 March 2011
Other headlines:
Japan’s crisis may have already derailed ‘nuclear renaissance’
The world has seen a surge of nuclear reactor projects recently, and President Obama has made a push for nuclear power. But the crisis at the Fukushima No. 1 (Daiichi) nuclear plant may abruptly halt those efforts.
The nuclear crisis in Japan, even if authorities are able to bring damaged reactors under control, has cast doubts on the future of nuclear power as a clean-energy solution in the United States and around the globe, – Los Angeles Times, 14 March 2011
Japan Earthquake Holds Lessons and Warnings – Science Insider, 11 March 2011
I’d like to see a post about the thorium reactors that Mike Smith advocated here recently. There’s no reason to think that new reactors would still use 40-year-old designs.
Nuclear power should have a part to play in cutting carbon emissions.
I still haven’t seen a good case for why carbon has to be cut.
If gasoline (petrol) was discovered/invented now, it would be deemed far too dangerous for use. My maternal grandfather was a pioneer motorist in NZ and most of his contemporaries saw him as unhinged due to his championing of the Horseless Carriage.
The great mass of humanity are frightened by what the are ignorant of; my generation grew up under the shadow of Hiroshima and Nagasaki but the mechanics of nuclear power were a closed book to most of us, therefore the 1940s Atomic Bomb was the mental construct of atomic power and still is for most who are frightened of it due to their own ignorance.
But, given time, we grow up and learn stuff. ‘The Wizard of Oz’ movie scared me witless at the age of five; now I know the storylines I apreciate the movie as a wonderful piece of alegorical storytelling, but the movie is wildly unsuitable for five-year-olds who don’t have the maturity and concepts to understand it.
Many journalists and alarmists are not very adult.
The Japanese will learn from this and build stronger and safer. The Fukushima facility performed beyond its design specifictations and all but survived an earthquake far bigger than anticipated. Strange that none of the media latched onto that little factoid…
I watched the late news in Canada cover the situation at the reactors in Japan. The first night the CBC had a sound byte from Michio Kaku, the string theorist, who is Japanese American (presumably, from a media perspective, this makes him qualified), then they had an interview with a guy from ‘Friends of the Earth’ whose qualification appeared to be that he was available. Geography was not this guy’s long suit: he warned of a potential radioactive plume (implying it would reach North America – 5,000 miles to the East). CTV had no scientist, just an environmentalist.
Last night CBC had an environmentalist, then an extensive interview with the guy running Bruce Power who is an expert on nuclear reactors. CTV had one or two more environmentalists.
I was impressed that CBC at least managed to find one person who knew something about the situation and nuclear reactors. Nonetheless, the coverage has been strongly directed towards the opinions of unqualified environmentalists, rather than the well informed.
All this goes to show that the media are, at a minimum, pig ignorant. Not just about science, but in general. Its a shame, really.
Chinese officials have requested extra compensation for the families of Chinese students killed by the Christchurch earthquake. They say China’s one-child policy means the families will face long-term economic hardship.
I guess if you don’t believe in God, then there is no such thing as an “Act of God”
Some “climate scientists” are saying AGW causes earthquakes. New Zealand ratified Kyoto on 19 December 2002. China never did, so China brought on this earthquake by not ratifying Kyoto. China has only themselves to blame. China should pay the families for their failure.
Senator Lieberman (I-Conn) has called for a moritorium on nuc plants. We know what that means.
I’m sure that the Japanese will feel a lot safer with more of this from “safe” natural gas, when the next big one hits.
Natural gas, the “most practical low carbon-emission alternative” — just don’t get too close when one of those tanks or pipelines bursts.
Natural gas is (should be) the future of sensible energy for the next two centuries.
The following URL sent from a colleague in Japan has a video of the shape of the tsunami as it struck Japan. It seemed to be almost perfectly lined up with the coastline so that it struck the entire coastline almost simultaneously.
http://mdn.mainichi.jp/
What amazes me is that an estimated 10,000 people are dead as a result of the earthquake and tsunami and the press is focusing on the troubles at a nuclear plant which, as near as can be determined, has not harmed anyone and is being safely shut down .
Perverse.
Its too soon to make any clear and factually supportable judgements about global nuclear plant safety until much more information is available on what actually happened to the nuclear plants impacted by this huge event in Japan. The antinuclear people will always attempt to take advantage of such events to push their nuclear fear agenda but at this point most everything said is based on speculation. From an energy availability and utilization perspective the world is no position to abandon 500 nuclear plants today or any time soon. There are no doubt lessons to be learned from these unfortunate events in Japan but that process will need to unfold in the coming months and years hopefully through rational and thoughtful deliberations.
The technical merits of nuclear power, the “need” to switch from coal for electrical power generation, and the safety record of commercial reactors will get lost in the fog of perception.
Even if the Japanese themselves build new, safer, reactors, I suspect this crisis will kill the promising re-birth of nuclear power in the United States. It won’t matter that we have plenty of land that is geologically stable or that current reactor designs are far better than these older reactors. What will matter for the next decade or so, what will only matter, are the current reports of meltdown(s) in Japan—a technology giant using US-designed reactors.
stantonn says:
March 14, 2011 at 6:08 am
“telegraph now reporting the fuel rods are exposed in no.3.”
I wonder which Telegraph reporter went and had a peek!
Pure unadulterated speculation!
I think Algeria just announced 1000tcf of shale gas under their country, Poland 80tcf etc etc.
The world uses 2.9tcf per yeat.
NG is the fuel for the next 1000 years.
Already the US plastic industry (which was moving overseas) is expanding because cheap NG is a good feedstock.
I think this disaster should be an advertisement for Nuclear Power.
When it’s all said and done, no loss of life due to nuclear radiation after a 9.0 earthquake and tsunami.
But the pro-nukes will be forced to defend what will be easily defended, or else the anti-nukes will turn it into a poster child, a la Three Mile Island.
All that has to be done, since most reactors are near the sea because of cooling water proximity, besides building them away from fault lines, is to elevate the backup generators. If they were elevated, the reactors would be all still functioning perfectly.
As to the heating of the coolant water and harming fishes? Facts are completely contrary to that speculation. I live in Florida, and our reactor nearby is a haven for fish and manatees. Wildlife authorities say that this situation saved thousands of large fish, manatees and alligators from the recent cold spell. So, reactors save endangered species, without a doubt.
Nuclear reactors save lives, in many ways.
mkelly says:
March 14, 2011 at 7:45 am
Lieberman has always shown that he is the master politician. He only lies when his lips are moving.
I’d be willing to bet that far more off duty nuclear workers were killed in the tsunami than will ever be killed by radiation from the plants.
Like it or not, perception vs. reality is what trumps, and nuclear power will take a hit from this event. Alternative energy, especially solar will be a big winner, and with cheaper, more flexible, and more efficient solar coming on-line, this will be the biggest winner in the next few years. Look for the “off the grid” movement to gain momentum from this as well. Even so, all this alternative energy will not replace oil or coal for many decades, and (except for any new major incidents), nuclear will come back as well, eventually, but it will take some time…
The problem with nuclear power plants is that they are designed by technicians who are thinking in operational efficiency as the standard for the design of the plants , whilst the safety of the citizen should be paramount in the nuclear design . Technicians are tending to put complicated technological solutions above simple common sense thinking , which probably is less influenced by cost efficiency thinking. Two examples from other industrial designing may elucidate the difference here . Based upon staying competitive in the market-place , mainly in the eye of the consumer , cars are manufactured in all sorts of attractiveness for the consumer and not like the famous trabant from a complete technological point of view with the lowest possible costings .
40 years ago i coordinated the design of a horsestall for the b747 and we incorporated nearly all available experience and asked all experts in this field to improve the original design . The result was a horsestall , which was 100% safe for the horse and a dream for every horse-owner , but a technological very average design . It could be improved by any engineer who looked with an eye for best technical solutions . That is exactly what our competition did and they went absolutely no place as we kept nearly all the business by guaranteeing a safe journey for all horses that we carried . Yes put the customer first and let the technicians do the job there after . The reactor would have cost probably double the price , but human life would not have been in danger .
Sometimes setting some absolute standards may look a bit overdone , but there will always be a moment that murphies law is being played out .
has not harmed anyone and is being safely shut down.
Well, not exactly. There are people injured from the explosions and contaminated. And the reactors are not save yet. But that is indeed nothing compared to the casualties of the earhquake and tsunami.
By the way, as I understand the explosions were caused by hydrogen. Is that not the fuel of the future?
mkelly says:
March 14, 2011 at 7:45 am
“Senator Lieberman (I-Conn) has called for a moritorium on nuc plants.”
Senator Lieberman called for a temporary moratorium on nuke plant construction until the ‘lessons learned’ from Japan could be digested.
Since there are no nuclear plant currently under construction all it really means is a possible temporary delay in the start of construction of Vogtle Unit #3. Site prep is going on at Voglte #3 but actual full scale construction wasn’t expected to be commence before late this year anyway.
Congressman Markey who is the biggest pain in the nuclear industry’s backside has called for a temporary moratorium on construction of nuclear plants in ‘seismically active’ locations. The last I checked no one in California is looking to build a nuclear plant anytime soon anyway.
There are going to be ‘lessons learned’, nothing wrong with pausing to learn those lessons.
Henry P and John Marshall both mentioned the Thorium MSR reactors, the ones China is hot to implement on a large scale.
I did some additional reading on the ThMSR reactors and am pretty convinced that they would be smaller and NOT likely to threaten meltdowns. Smaller is good. It sounded like the Chinese might even be able to make them modular. Modular is good, as it affords the possibility of mounting them with flexible connections which would be good in quakes – and if the building can absorb most of the impact of a tsunami, the equipment would fair well. It is something engineering can deal with readily.
I could be wrong on this, but that is my take for the moment. If anyone has learned something that would contradict this POV, give a holler.
R. Gates says:
March 14, 2011 at 8:44 am
Like it or not, perception vs. reality is what trumps, and nuclear power will take a hit from this event. Alternative energy, especially solar will be a big winner,
Living as I do in a three storey house, whose upper floor outside windows have not been cleaned in the 25 years that I have owned it, because of the perception of window cleaners that the elevation might be too dangerous to justify the financial return, I have accepted the reality that at the age of 71, I am unlikely to install solar panels that readily accumulate a green algal bloom, on the surmounting roof.
This despite my govt. charging me a renewable tax with which to bribe me by paying many times the going rate for any power that might be produced.
In my experience very few people in the UK are aware of the annually increasing Renewable Obligation tax on their power consumption, but when they are, the retribution on the incumbent party will be swift and sure.
Needless to say, I spend some of my time informing a number of incredulous acquaintances and I hope all UK sceptics do the same.