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
jorgekafkazar says:
March 14, 2011 at 10:15 am
R. Gates says: “…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.”
Solar power is the wave of the future. And always will be.
________
Not the future…it’s happening now…big time. Some amazing advances in the technology are right at our doorstep with decreasing costs and increasing efficiences that are truly amazing. See for example:
http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-01-graphene-electrodes-solar-cells.html
Solar power will be a part of every home and every office energy system mix in the near future. Going “off grid” for at least some of the power in homes and offices will be the norm, with atachment to the smart-grid to get credit for your excess power also a part of the mix.
_______
Theo Goodwin says:
March 14, 2011 at 10:42 am
“Yes, the MSM color that perception to one degree or another, but perceived problems with nuclear safety, real or not, will alter those risk vs. reward ratios.”
Color their perception to a degree? R, they are flat-out scare mongering. They are turning a non-event involving nuclear reactors into a nightmare the size of Armageddon. They are replacing fact with their perception. They are lying or, perhaps, they are incomprehensibly stupid.
_____
The media have always been sensationalist, so the issue of nuclear safety is just one easy mark for them the make money on by attracting readers and viewers. This is nothing new. There is no changing it, so why whine about it? Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, and now Japan have become iconic reasons for the public to be generally hesitant about wanting a nuclear power plant in their neighborhood. For better or worse, right or wrong, nuclear power is going to take a hit from this latest event. Bemoan the MSM as sensationalist all you want, but it will do you no good. Solar power is a rising star that is getting better and better every day in cost vs. benefit ratios and this event, rightly or wrongly, will only boost that momentum for solar.
By the way, R, you have never actually responded to anything I have said when commenting on your posts. Would you please address what I say and the words that I use when I comment on your posts? We do want an even playing field, right?
R. Gates says:
March 14, 2011 at 9:51 am
‘As, alternative energy sources, especially renewable solar’
The Saudi’s have been working on solar for 30 years. To the best of my knowledge they’ve never managed to solve the abrasion problem. I.E. Places with exceptionally good solar potential are deserts, sand is an abrasive. For solar panels to be viable they need to stand up to heavy abrasion. Thermal Solar needs water, water is in short supply in deserts(pay attention to the arguments over building a solar park in Southern California).
So the places where solar is most cost effective either have an abrasion problem or a water problem.
Solar power ?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1350811/In-China-true-cost-Britains-clean-green-wind-power-experiment-Pollution-disastrous-scale.html
Or more MSM scaremongering ?
Chernobyl ?
http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles/chernobyl.html
“In its final conclusions on the health effects of the Chernobyl accident, the UNSCEAR report stated the following:
“The number of thyroid cancers (about 1,800) in individuals exposed in childhood, in particular in the severely contaminated areas of the three affected countries, is considerably greater than expected based on previous knowledge. The high incidence and the short induction period are unusual. Other factors may be influencing the risk.”
One of these factors are what are called “occult” thyroid cancers, those detected at autopsies by histological studies, and which do not cause visible clinical disturbances during the person’s lifetime. These occult thyroid cancers occur en masse all over the world. For example, in Canada their incidence is 6,000 per 100,000 population; in Poland it is 9,000; in the United States 13,000; and in Finland 35,000. The highest incidence of thyroid cancers in children found in Russia, before the Chernobyl accident, was 26.6 per 100,000; in Belarus, 17.9; and in Ukraine, 4.9. Thus, the potential for the discovery of “excess” thyroid cancers, after the intense health screening that took place after the accident, is enormous”
Rhoda R says:
March 14, 2011 at 10:56 am
It’s a pity that we can’t find a way to store solar power that’s as efficint as plant life.
Growing wood…..and burning it?
Of course,that would impact on foodcrops
The nuclear disaster in Japan seems to be largely an artifact.
The reactors were safely shut down immediately on the first shocks from the earthquake.
Thereafter, the problem becomes primarily financial.
Shutting down a reactor permanently is easy, just drop the control rods and walk away. The residual heat will boil off the water in the reactor and once uncooled, the fuel will then disintegrate. Some modest radioactivity may be vented, but nothing like Chernobyl, where a good fraction of the core was blasted into the air by a reactor briefly generating a hundredfold multiple of full power, because all the control rods had been winched out of the core.
TEPCO, the utility that runs these reactors, can at most be blamed for not recognizing early enough that much of this multi billion dollar facility was a total loss, so that the only priority was to minimize the perception damage, regardless of equipment losses. That would have had the sea water and boron cooling, which ends a reactors service life, started immediately, with the focus on keeping the reactors cooled enough to avoid emissions. They might have saved unit 2 then, with the resources spent on 1 and 3.
As is, all three are lost, but with the accident 3 days ago, the residual heat in these reactors is now too low for any massive outburst.
The crisis has passed, even though one could not tell from the headlines.
The more I read the real facts about this disaster from a nuclear standpoint, the better I feel about nuclear power’s potential safety. I look at the media going alarmist, and I just laugh sadly at the stupid lies. Dr Kaku should be [snip] ashamed of himself, by the way. That guy is clearly fully intoxicated on the cool-aid of selling books instead of writing on research. The fact that “China syndrome” even came out of his mouth on air is shameful.
Before this incident I thought melt downs lioek happened at Chernobyl were always catastrophic, watching the Japanese meltdowns I am learning that modern technology keeps all the mess in a sealed flask and meltdowns from now on will be minor events that do not impact on the environment. These events make me more inclined to accept nuclear energy as part of the mix.
Even my Japanese wife, who gets emotional when nuclear power is mentioned, has understood that meltdowns can be controlled and dealt with safely; she is flying to Japan on Friday and is more concerned about this earthquake triggering a Tokyo earthquake while she is there than being poisoned by radioactive cesium.
This could be good for the nuclear industry, it wipes out bad memories of Chernobyl
harrywr2 says:
March 14, 2011 at 11:28 am
R. Gates says:
March 14, 2011 at 9:51 am
‘As, alternative energy sources, especially renewable solar’
The Saudi’s have been working on solar for 30 years. To the best of my knowledge they’ve never managed to solve the abrasion problem. I.E. Places with exceptionally good solar potential are deserts, sand is an abrasive. For solar panels to be viable they need to stand up to heavy abrasion. Thermal Solar needs water, water is in short supply in deserts(pay attention to the arguments over building a solar park in Southern California).
So the places where solar is most cost effective either have an abrasion problem or a water problem.
_____
Solar energy technology is evolving rapidly. We are on the cusp of many cheaper, more efficient technologies that will make replacing a solar panel as easy and cheap as replacing a window in your house. Take for example, this kind of research:
http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-03-method-molecule-reactions-breakthrough-chemistry.html
http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-03-faux-trees-co2-o2.html
I’m not saying there aren’t problems with putting current solar panels in certain parts of the world, but just as they have many glass skyscrapers in buildings in hot dry areas, so too, the cities in these areas in the near future will have millions of solar panels that will be as ubiquitous as glass windows.
But thought the solar energy revolution is really only getting started, fossil fuels, nuclear, wind, hydro, etc. will all play a role in the total energy mix in the decades to come. The current negative press that nuclear is getting will only serve to give an an extra push to momentum that is already building for solar and other more green energy sources.
Two generations ago, perhaps less, MSM would have reported entirely differently. The paucity of scientifically minded (let alone qualified) journalists today is demonstrated by the utter trash that some reporters spew out, which, unfortunately, is believed by the ever-growing multitude of like-minded members of the public, much to the ghastly delight of the water melons.
R. Gates says:
March 14, 2011 at 11:27 am
“The media have always been sensationalist, so the issue of nuclear safety is just one easy mark for them the make money on by attracting readers and viewers. This is nothing new. There is no changing it, so why whine about it?”
Nope. False. The media once was a bunch of professionals with self-respect. Then anchors became stars and all hell broke loose.
The MSM’s behavior cannot be explained by sensationalism. The tsunami was sensational and its effects are even more sensational. But the MSM is not covering those. Something else took their focus off the people and put it on the nuclear plants. There is an agenda at work here. Finally, this is not a case of “boys will be boys.” The results of this behavior are seriously harmful.
http://twitpic.com/49ilxu – semi-relevant AlGore cartoon.
Well Juliar Gillard has stated that Australia doesn’t need nuclear energy, coming from her that means we’ll have Russians out here building the old graphite burning/moderated type in four months. ; )
R. Gates says:
March 14, 2011 at 11:27 am
Solar power is the wave of the future. And always will be.
________
Not the future…it’s happening now…big time. Some amazing advances in the technology are right at our doorstep with decreasing costs and increasing efficiences that are truly amazing.
=========================
It doesn’t matter how efficient they become – well actually, the upper theoretical limit is 100% – because they will never capture more energy than arrives from the sun. So to take your scenario to the extreme, and you could by thousands of square metres that you can unroll like a carpet for a few dollars, where can you put it? Roof top panels yield derisory amounts of power. My leisure centre has covered every square centimeter of the roof with hundres of square metres. I check the power readings every time I go there – all those hundreds of metres have never generated more than 3kw – about enough to boil the kettle.
But if you unroll thousands of square kilometres all over the countryside, you will kill everything that depends on sunlight. See what the Greens will have to say about that.
Don’t know about anyone else but I have been totally impressed with these reactor’s robustness. I had always thought them to be much more fragile.
It always amazes me how easily mankind is blamed when it is nature that so regularly kills thousands upon thousands. Our world is better now than at any time in the past, despite our shortcomings.
Thanks for all of the expert information supplied by fellow commentators here at WUWT throughout this unbelievable natural disaster.
But one aspect of nuclear plant design I don’t understand. Why were the rectors scrammed in the first place. Why were the generators disconnected. If the reactor and generators were built as an entire integral system, the only problem would be what to do with the excess electrical load as power lines around the countryside broke their tie to the grid.
To me every plant needs an acre of ni-chrome artificial load, basically a huge toaster outside the plant. Somewhere to dump the excess electric power being produced while a more controlled winddown is performed. That way the heat would be electrically transferred to the environment temporarily. Don’t shutoff the generators unless other problems occur, but instead, dump all of this excess energy to the air outside.
The normal now is to disconnect the generators and then you always have the problem of huge heat buildup in the reactor. Never understood that logic.
Just a thought.
R. Gates says:
Look for the “off the grid” movement to gain momentum from this as well.
“Off the grid” seems like a better idea every day. Mainly because I think the grid may not remain functional too much longer.
Madman2001 says:
Perverse.
That pretty much says it all.
I’m in Australia. Two things over the last two days:
The radio station that I listen to had people calling in voicing their opinion on whether Australia should have nuclear power “now that we know the risks of an earthquake.”
I heard on the radio this morning that Julia Gillard has said that Australia will never have nuclear power because we don’t need, she said, “we have enough geothermal, wind, solar, tidal, you name it we have enough renewable energy.”
R. Gates says:
March 14, 2011 at 12:14 pm
“Solar energy technology is evolving rapidly. We are on the cusp of many cheaper, more efficient technologies that will make replacing a solar panel as easy and cheap as replacing a window in your house.”
Jimmy Carter’s 1980 State of the Union Address
http://www.jimmycarterlibrary.gov/documents/speeches/su80jec.phtml
Our Nation will then have a major conservation effort, important initiatives to develop solar power
Affordable solar power has been ‘just around the corner’ for 30 years.
Julian in Wales says:
March 14, 2011 at 12:07 pm
“Before this incident I thought melt downs lioek happened at Chernobyl were always catastrophic, watching the Japanese meltdowns I am learning that modern technology keeps all the mess in a sealed flask and meltdowns from now on will be minor events that do not impact on the environment. ”
“This could be good for the nuclear industry, it wipes out bad memories of Chernobyl”
Exactly my thoughts too.
R. Gates says:
March 14, 2011 at 8:44 am
Nuclear is taking a hit, via WAGS in the press as to what is going on inside vessels that cannot be viewed.
Depends on the end result. The current problem is with old reactors. Once built, they tend to become monoliths and are not easily given up to new units which are far safer.
I would look for Thorium reactors to come of age given pressing needs.
But, you are correct that for now, Nuclear takes a hit.
“The highest incidence of thyroid cancers in children found in Russia, before the Chernobyl accident, was 26.6 per 100,000; in Belarus, 17.9; and in Ukraine, 4.9. Thus, the potential for the discovery of “excess” thyroid cancers, after the intense health screening that took place after the accident, is enormous”
If I gathered data saw a 5:1 differential in incidence of a certain cancer in children in adjacent countries I would
1) question my methodology and/or
2) look for another cause of the cancer
R. Gates alternative sources of energy will only catch on if only as easily accessable as the flip of a switch. As someone already mentioned there is only so much solar energy per square meter. Oh another thing there is life out in those so called bare desolate deserts.
It is reassuring that the new NRC-certified “Standard Designs” will not need any re-engineering as they ALREADY ANTICIPATED ,and were designed for a similar but worse problem than occurred in Japan to one or two of the 53 Japanese reactors after the Earthquake and Tsunami. All 53 shut down as designed, but one or two had partial problems providing coolant while the huge and hot reactors cooled down over 72 hours or so. Now that 72 hours have gone by,e all the cool-downs have occurred, so there is no longer even any partial concern.
There were designed to be so-called “Passive” and not need any power from commercial or standby emergency generators, although they have them, too. They are designed to place the emergency coolant water tank above the reactor, so the water will flow down into the reactor without any pumps or the electric power needed to run them. Instead of electric pumps they rely on “passive” Gravity which causes water to flow downhill.
Further they are designed with much larger reactor coolant volumes, so little more will need to be added, in the up to 72 hour cool-down period. Meanwhile, the urgency to do so has been extended from 45 minutes, to several hours, allowing more time for operators to respond appropriately. In addition, these new “Standard Designs” have been modified so that natural thermal convection will circulate sufficient coolant throughout the reactor vessel without needing any pumps, or electric power for them. They use the “passive”‘ fact that hot water rises and cool water falls, creating a natural circulation.
In short these new reactors are already proving to be what all wanted the reactors of the time to be,even the critics, and were not.
For sure we will always have idiots and demagogues, like demagogue Ed Markey who simply want to hear themselves bray.
The nightmare of nuclear power gets worse:
“Japan’s nightmare gets even WORSE: All THREE damaged nuclear reactors now in ‘meltdown’ at tsunami-hit power station”
Japan calls for U.S. help cooling the reactor
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1365781/Japan-earthquake-tsunami-All-3-Fukushima-nuclear-plant-reactors-meltdown.html#ixzz1GcLhBa2v
Obviously there are systemic problems with these particular reactors. Whether of design or operational maintenance or a combination seems unclear. The worst aspect of the disaster management has been the evident lack of clear information and uncertainty of outcome.
If 1/50th of the money that has been put into developing hot nuclear energy had been put into developing low energy nuclear reaction, LENR, most of the problems with energy production would go away. And there would be no more real life horror movies from nuclear energy. Instead the government says it doesn’t work. The government also says “greenhouse gases are pollution”. ;O)
For those who don’t know what LENR is this documentary will give an introduction to it:
“Fire from Water, hosted by Scotty from Star Trek”