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
There are reports coming out of official Japanese sources of damage to the bottom of one of the vessels and drop of pressure. In short there are reports that one of the reactors might be leaking. Does this mean the meltdown is going through the bottom of the reactors and we have a worst case scenario? Reading through the comments I have felt reassured the reactors are designed to contain a total meltdown, is this a wrong assumption?
Julian in Wales says:
March 14, 2011 at 12:07 pm
This could be good for the nuclear industry, it wipes out bad memories of Chernobyl
Man, the opposite is happening. Everyone is reminded of Chernobyl and how much of a nightmare nuclear energy is. If this thing in Japan is contained why are they scrambling with desperate measures? There’s safer ways to make electricity.
The only reason the Navy hasn’t had any nuclear power accidents is because of the vigilance they have in watching over it. That is the vigilance of a soldier. But that vigilance is paid for by tax dollars. With budget cuts that MUST take place in the next decade in America there is going to be less soldiers. There are cheaper and safer ways to make electricity.
R. Gates says:
March 14, 2011 at 11:27 am
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
How efficient are these solar panels under a layer of snow?
These things are fine if you live somewhere with continuous sun as I do and I have solar heating which as another poster stated leads to cool showers in the winter. But put them in upstate New York under a few feet of snow and you have to be ‘on grid’.
Of course you could rely on your windmill that has frozen in the still cold frosty air and which needs power from the snow covered solar cells to keep its oil warm and liquid.
I have a suggestion – instead of talking theoretically go to upstate New York, Minnesota or the Dakotas and set up an ‘off grid’ house and show everyone how its done.
I read tonight, with some astonishment, an acknowledgement from Geoffrey Lean (for it is he), in an otherwise fairly predictable article, that shale gas was a likely contender against nukes now … fell off me chair, nearly. Maybe he was too exercised about nuclear to bother carping …
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/nuclearpower/8379926/Japan-earthquake-Nuclear-power-under-fire.html
‘Natural gas, one of the causes of the initial decline in nuclear, is becoming cheaper with the development of new technologies to wring it from shale rock. And the failure of the Obama administration to get climate legislation through Congress has dealt the US industry a particularly severe blow: the defeated “cap and trade” proposals were expected to spur the construction of another 100 reactors. ‘
Julian in Wales says:
March 14, 2011 at 3:33 pm
Reading through the comments I have felt reassured the reactors are designed to contain a total meltdown, is this a wrong assumption?
With Japan calling on the US for help that shows there is something seriously wrong. I cannot see how anyone can say everything is under control and there’s nothing to worry about. This is actually a nightmare. And I hope and really pray it is over very soon. I want to hear some good news soon.
nc says:
March 14, 2011 at 2:41 pm
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.
____
The idea that solar energy can only be useful by vast arrays of solar panels in the desert is pretty old school. New technologies right around the corner will allow your roof, walls, windows, sidewalks…really almost anything anywhere to become a solar energy source. These are also vastly more efficient than the first and second generation solar cells and this efficiency, combined with new low energy use technology such as organic LED’s etc. will allow many people to begin to go “off grid” for much of their power. This decentralization of electric power is big deal and will be something to pay attention to.
CPS Energy suspends talk about nuclear expansion
Monday, March 14, 2011
CPS Energy [San Antonio] and NRG Energy have agreed to suspend talks about CPS possibly buying [additional] power from the proposed nuclear expansion at the South Texas Project while Japan deals with its ongoing nuclear disaster, CEO Doyle Beneby said Monday.
NRG has a partnership agreement with Tokyo Electric Power Co., which owns the disabled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, to invest in the STP expansion if the project secured U.S. loan guarantees. NRG was also counting on loan guarantees from the Japanese government.
…
CPS is a 6.7 percent owner in the proposed expansion, and was set to get $80 million from NRG once the project is awarded a federal loan guarantee. That was expected in the next few weeks; it’s unclear how the disaster will affect that process.
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/energy/article/CPS-Energy-suspends-talk-about-nuclear-expansion-1128743.php
Well what do you know, a third explosion reported.
A third explosion in four days rocked the earthquake-damaged Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant…..
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110314/ap_on_bi_ge/as_japan_earthquake_nuclear_crisis
So is someone going to tell me again everything is okay?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/14/fukushiima_analysis/
There was serious damage to an adjacent reactor from the second explosion. There is a report that there is beginning of melt down in that newly damaged reactor. I’m looking for confirmation.
So someone tell me this is not a friggin nightmare.
Ian W says:
March 14, 2011 at 3:47 pm
“I have a suggestion – instead of talking theoretically go to upstate New York, Minnesota or the Dakotas and set up an ‘off grid’ house and show everyone how its done.”
____
I find it interesting to see the types of people who seem to think that living “off grid” is impossible. There are many ways to do it…in update NY, there’s lots of small hydro power potential with plentiful water. Many small hydropower facilities were abandoned over the past 50 years in favor of big centralized power. Small, decentralized hydropower systems are just one example of what could be done over many regions of the NE U.S. and into Canada. Of course, the Dakotas have plentiful wind so one could easily go “off grid” or nearly so just through small decentralized wind farms.
Of course the big money centralized power generation related corporations who stand to lose a lot as going off-grid really starts to catch on would like to preach the never-ending world of big centralized coal, gas, and nuclear plants, and the idea that people could be more independent in their electric power usage bother’s them greatly as it could hit their fat and happy little profit margins rather severely.
harrywr2 says: March 14, 2011 at 9:07 am
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.
————————————————
California has a law on the books that no new nukes shall be built until the waste storage problem is solved. Since the waste storage “problem” is political and not economic, technical, or safety related, it’s gonna be a long time before California sees additional cheap safe reliable power. I’ve been watching the addition of 740 MW of wind turbines a few miles of my house, and they turn about 1/3 of the time. That does not meet the definition of reliability.
Jammed valves, sea-water flooded electricity control rooms, critical diesel generators running out of fuel, terrible public communications, successive explosions injuring or killing staff, instrumentation failures, … all on top of mass evacuations – it has to be a nightmare.
Nightmare is too strong a word. Thus far there have been no deaths from this.
Hopefully there will not be any in the future either.
It is however an horrific industrial catastrophe.
The damaged containments will have to remain closed for a long time, probably entombed like the Chernobyl reactor. There is no way that the remains can be easily cut up and removed. They are too inaccessible and too radioactive inside.
It is likely that there will be continued emissions of radioactive gas from the debris for months, but not in massive amounts. The nuclear vessel has been injected with enough boron to neutralize most of the reactions.
It will be a mess, but not a Chernobyl type wipeout with an exclusion zone of hundreds of square kilometers, because the reactors are off and the residual energy in the cores is not enough to blast debris into the stratosphere or far around.
The accident leaves 3 severely damaged reactors at the site, probably making the whole complex unusable. A $15-20 billion loss.
It is not a night mare!
It is an industrial accident no more no less.
Other industrial systems have caused far more damage and death than nuclear power ever has.
Dam failures — too many to list
Train derailments with bleeve explosions
Mine tailing pile collapses no fewer than 91 since 1960 http://www.wise-uranium.org/mdaf.html
Cleveland East Ohio Gas Explosion October 20, 1944
coal mine fires that have been burning for decades such as Centralia Pennsylvania May 1962
Texas City Texas Grandcamp explosion April 16, 1947
Halifax, Nova Scotia, 1917 and the SS Mont-Blanc explosion
Bhopal India methyl isocyanate release
Chlorine gas release accidents such as Macdona TX, June 2004
Norfolk Southern Train Derailment Graniteville, SC January 6, 2005
Tenerife airport disaster in 1977 — 569 killed
Boiler explosions — to many to list
sugar mill and grain silo explosions — too many to list
oil refinery explosions — to many to list
Each of the above have killed far more people than all the nuclear reactor accidents in history combined. Some of them like the Centralia coal mine fires have permanently destroyed an entire town and made it uninhabitable for a life time.
Larry
Amino Acids in Meteorites says:
March 14, 2011 at 2:58 pm
“The nightmare of nuclear power gets worse:”
No, Amino, the nightmare at that particular nuclear facility in Japan gets worse. Focus on the facts, please. The facts are all at this particular nuclear facility in Japan.
The only criticism of the nuclear industry that can be inferred from this particular problem is that the nuclear industry sometimes places nuclear plants in the wrong place. No one expects a nuclear plant to survive the conditions created when a tsunami destroys all its resources and so devastates the region that resupply and repair are all but impossible. To generalize from this particular situation to the entire nuclear industry is simply unjustified.
hotrod (Larry L) says:
March 14, 2011 at 5:30 pm
Amino Acids in Meteorites says:
March 14, 2011 at 4:47 pm
There was serious damage to an adjacent reactor from the second explosion. There is a report that there is beginning of melt down in that newly damaged reactor. I’m looking for confirmation.
So someone tell me this is not a friggin nightmare.
It is not a night mare!
It is an industrial accident no more no less…
_____
It quite clearly is a nightmare…it may or may not be “catastrophic” (only time will tell) but it clearly is a nightmare for the Japanese people. The people in Japan are going through the worst nightmare that most of them will ever experience, and the nuclear meltdowns are certainly part of it. To try and minimize this nightmare they are going through is quite an insult to that nation.
Theo Goodwin says:
March 14, 2011 at 5:53 pm
No one expects a nuclear plant to survive the conditions created when a tsunami destroys….
You mean they didn’t plan for this scenario? How many other scenarios have not been planned for in nuclear power plants?
There will always be nightmare scenarios like this in nuclear power. There will always be something that was not planned for. Hot nuclear is the most dangerous way to make electricity. There are safer ways.
No it is you and the folks that are trying to magnify an already terrible situation into something it is not that is the insult.
They are currently struggling against terrific difficulties, and I wish them the very best possible outcome, but inflating everyone’s fear about the circumstances does absolutely no one any good. They have been hit by a combination of events that are completely outside the planning envelope.
Disaster planners look at both the likely and the unlikely scenarios and then combine the highest impact and most likely situations as their planning limit. They know full well that no nation and no planner can contemplate all possible and incredibly rare scenarios. They spend their time money and effort protecting against the situations that are reasonably likely to happen that have the highest impact and the most effective mitigation strategies.
This combination of events was not a “reasonably likely event” by anyone’s experience. We would be wise to pay very close attention to how this works out since we are in exactly the same situation with California, Oregon and Washington state. We have a predictable likelihood of a similar intensity earth quake in the north west and a great deal of population and technological infrastructure at risk to locally generated tsunamis.
That said — taking the legitimate focus off of the disaster recovery efforts and the rescue of the people buried in the rubble from the earthquake and tsunami and inciting unjustified panic over an industrial emergency that is of local impact, is literally killing people.
The countries disaster situation is certainly a night mare, but the nuclear plant problems is not a night mare it is simply a very small component of a much larger picture. It is not even remotely comparable to the damage already done to the nation of Japan by the earth quake and tsunami and the sooner people focus on legitimate constructive actions to serve the recovery and rescue of the trapped and injured and provide them shelter, water and food and quit the mental masturbation over imagined catastrophes the better off everyone will be.
Having worked as a disaster emergency planner for nuclear facilities and having been intimately involved in the creation of one of our countries FEMA sponsored disaster rescue teams (two of which have already been dispatched) I know full well the challenges they are dealing with.
One of the things that they absolutely do not need is out of control media reporters, and back seat coaching from uninformed pundits, whipping up fear and anxiety.
The sooner folks step back and start looking at the facts of the situation and quit trying to incite panic the better off everyone will be.
My point was this situation at the nuclear plant is not any different than thousands of other major industrial accidents, many of which have caused hundreds of more fatalities than the Nuclear Power industry. In every case they were managed by people that took the best information they had at the time and made the best decisions they could based on what they knew and what resources they had available. The only difference between the nuclear reactor situation and a burning chemical plant or oil refinery or a shipload of potentially explosive cargo is the mechanism of the threat, the results of a miscalculation in both cases can be very serious, and there is absolutely nothing “special” about nuclear energy in that regard.
Larry
Unfortunately more bad news
cooling effort at one reactor failing
The plant’s operator, Tokyo Electric Power, said late Monday that repeated efforts to inject seawater into the reactor had failed, causing water levels inside the reactor’s containment vessel to fall and exposing its fuel rods
link to article
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/rest-of-world/Emergency-cooling-effort-failing-at-Japanese-reactor-deepening-crisis/articleshow/7705671.cms
A FIRE has broken out at the number-four reactor at the quake-hit Fukushima No.1
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/fire-burning-at-japan-nuclear-reactor/story-e6frf7jx-1226021782079
Is the nuclear situation part of the nightmare? Yes of course, but the comment you just quoted was specifically reffering to whether the reactor incidents occuring right now are a nightmare and even I, with 10 seconds of reading, can understand that the comment was directed solely at quoted passage where “nightmare” in this case is inferring that the whole situation with the reactors has been blown out of proportion – and it has.
Whether or not the issues here have been overstated or not has no bearing on the devastation that was caused by this earthquake and I saw no attempt to belittle or diminish what is happening in Japan or what the people are going through, only pointing out that irrational fear and knee jerk reactions should not be tolerated.
The media is kicking this into a frenzy with no purpose than to scare the crap out of people and by this, are contributing to the overall “nightmare” that is this earthquake. By attempting to put the issues in perspective and having people understand the risks through better understanding can only assist in helping people and stopping the spread of unwarranted fear and overall lessen the nightmare which at this point in time is the best thing that can be done and far more helpful then in perpetuating a higher level of danger then there actually is.
Theo Goodwin, I don’t agree placement is the issue. The issue is inadequate fail-safe shut-down facilities including inadequate protection from flooding plus I expect operational deficiencies and certainly very poor frankness and communications.
“nightmare” is probably too strong – but the developments on reactor #2 aren’t good.
According to WNN, there is damage to a system associated with the containment.
BWRs are designed to vent excess steam from the reactor into a toroidal structure which is connected to the containment. This is normally kept part full of water, and used to condense the steam.
It seems that this is no longer holding “above atmospheric” pressure, suggesting it’s leaking somewhere. However, at the time that pressure dropped, it wasn’t singificantly overpressured, so the cause isn’t obvious. There was a spike in radiation readings outside the plant (which subsequently reduced) at about the same time, suggesting venting.
At the same time, there’s the ongoing problem of getting the exposed rods covered with water. According to media comment, it’s now about the top 1/3rd uncovered. There is some fission product contamination being detected in the steam release, suggesting at least some fuel damage (BWR fuel is designed to spend at least some time exposed, with stam cooling).
What would be telling is an indication of reactor vessel pressure.
There’s no indication at the moment of a breach of the reactor presure vessel.
This is now a matter of timing. Normally, BWRs are opened up for refuelling about 4-7 days after coming off line, in a refuelling outage. At that time, in normal circumstances, decay heat production is low that pressurisation isn’t required in the reactor, and there’s adequate heat removal possible without boiling. pobviosly, no-one’s about to lift the lid on reactor #2 without having a good idea as to the condition of the fuel.
I know we’ve some people who post on WUWT who have significant Light Water Reactor experience, and even specific BWR backgrounds, If any of those read this, can they advise:
Can excess steam be vented via filtration without using the wetwell for condensation?
Is it possible to isolate the wetwell from the rest of the containment?
Is that 4-7 days figure right?
During a refuelling outage, it is usual to flood the entire containment? I ask this because, on the numbers as I see them, within a day or two, provided the fuel can be covered, if the RPV can be submerged, it ought to be able to achieve adeqate heat removal without further pumping, relying just on convection from the RPV walls.
photo of city where 10,000 people are missing
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/03/14/article-1366093-0B26E3E000000578-1000_964x657.jpg