From the Global Warming Policy Foundation
Throughout the history of Japan, its cities have been destroyed again and again by war, fire and earthquake. After each catastrophe, the Japanese have rebuilt, bigger and better. One hopes and expects that they will do the same again. –Lesley Downer, The Daily Telegraph, 15 March 2011
The Japanese disaster “will put new nuclear development on ice,” said Toronto energy consultant Tom Adams, the former executive director of Energy Probe. He said the nuclear industry was already facing challenges, noting that vast shale gas resources in North America and other parts of the world were starting to make cheaper gas-fired plants the electricity generators of choice. – Eric Reguly, The Globe and Mail, 15 March 2011
Neither new nuclear, coal with carbon capture and sequestration, wind nor solar are economic. Natural gas is queen. It is domestically abundant and is the bridge to the future. – John Rowe, The Globe and Mail, 15 March 2011
Obama’s energy plan relies heavily on nuclear power to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions harmful to the climate as well as to reduce dependence on imported oil. The president proposed tripling federal loan guarantees to $54.5 billion to help build new reactors in the 2012 budget plan he sent to Congress. — Jeremy van Loon and Mark Chediak, Bloomberg 15 March 2011
President Barack Obama’s energy agenda appears to be jinxed. While Japan’s nuclear meltdown may be an ocean away, the industry has quickly become the latest example of a policy in peril not long after the White House embraced it. –Darren Samuelsohn, Politico, 15 March 2011
Despite Japan’s crisis, India and China and some other energy-ravenous countries say they plan to keep using their nuclear power plants and building new ones. With those two countries driving the expansion — and countries from elsewhere in Asia, Eastern Europe and the Middle East also embracing nuclear power in response to high fossil fuel prices and concerns about global warming — the world’s stock of 443 nuclear reactors could more than double in the next 15 years, according to the World Nuclear Association, an industry trade group.—The New York Times, 14 March 2011
New data suggests Israel may not only have much larger gas resources than believed, but also the 3rd largest deposit of oil shale in the world. As a consequence of these new estimates, Israel may emerge as the third largest deposit of oil shale, after the US and China. –Dore Gold, The Jerusalem Post, 11 March 2011
Legatus says:
March 15, 2011 at 5:16 pm
Awesome.
The nuclear plants being built now are safer than at Fukushima Daiichi? Yes they are. But they are still not safe. I am certain that there are accident scenarios that have not been planned for in newer plants. Why do I say that? Because humans aren’t smart enough to foresee all scenarios. There will be more nuclear plant disasters. And apparently “the world’s stock of 443 nuclear reactors could more than double in the next 15 years”. With an increase of them there will be an increase in accidents. It is conceivable that nuclear fall out from some of them will be horrible.
But no one who approves of and builds them want believe that. So we will see more of these horror-movie-accidents-waiting-to-happen be built.
Cars are far, far better and safer today than they were even twenty years ago. Would anyone disagree?
There is no reason to think that modern nuclear power plants would not be much better and much safer than plants designed in the 1950’s.
Billy Liar says:
March 15, 2011 at 5:22 pm
I’ve got bad news for the ‘definitive posters’: The spent fuel pool in reactor No 4 has a non-zero chance of achieving criticality due to lack of water (it is apparently boiling).
I was wondering when someone would reach the “non-zero probability” level of scariness. Let’s put it into perspective:
If you lean against a wall, there is a non-zero probability that you will quantum tunnel to the other side of the wall and appear on the other side. Do you worry about that, too?
Come on people. Stop with the panic and try to stay rational.
There is a lot of conflicting information relating to what is occuring at the plant. I cannot comment on the spent fuel pools, or other aspects of the plant but the focus until now has been on the reactors and the reactors have all achieved cold shutdown:
The recent fires are concerning but there is very little information about what is happening other than they are not involving the reactors themselves and the source of radiation has not yet been determined, but from the above reports the chance of say a meltdown in any o fthe reactors seems to have passed. This is interesting in that the first story I read on mainstream news was that there were fears of meltdown in three of the reactors – there is an aweful lot of misinformation going around.
I think a detailed view of what has happened is just going to have to wait till things settle down and recovery begins.
etudiant says:
March 15, 2011 at 12:37 pm
Despite the nuclear disaster in Japan, it is insane, imo, to waste the spectacular raw material that is natural gas for boiler fuel.
What’s more is there a good chance that natural gas is not a fossil fuel at all but produced but natural processes in the earth’s mantle. If true that would mean there is not a “peak” natural gas.
Freeman Dyson talks about how natural gas may not be a fossil fuel starting at 0:59 of this video
Kev-in-Uk says:
March 15, 2011 at 3:49 pm
Dave Springer says:
March 15, 2011 at 1:45 pm
Ah – so you don’t think genetic engineering is potentially dangerous?
______________________________
The real problem is when companies like Monsanto design GMOs that can’t produce seeds and then spread pollen that contaminates natural crops. Next, these bast*rds sue farmers claiming that somehow they stole proprietary seed because the genetic signature indicative of Monsanto IP is in the farmer’s seed. And on top of that, it seems Monsanto lobbyists got the government to regulate small farmers and organic farmers under the guise of “food safety” and send out food police to arrest innocent farmers who want to share food.
What is the goal? Apparently, Monsanto wants to take over all food production. In that world, none of our food can produce seeds. You would have to buy Monsanto seeds that work only for one generation. Now imagine a catastrophe that is worse than the Japan earthquake. If civilization hit a serious bump in the road, in the past people could survive by growing their own food from seeds they kept. In the future, that option might not be possible.
We need to sue the pants off of Monsanto for failing to contain their lousy pollen that contaminates traditional crops. How are farmers supposed to keep their own seed if they might be sued by a big corporation that can’t be reined in?
It isn’t the modified bugs that I worry about. I worry more about scheming corporations that have a great idea and can’t tell themselves no. I worry about a government that writes regulations that cut competition to protect their favored corporate partners (corporate slaves actually). I worry about a judiciary that must write opinions on questions they have little hope of understanding in sufficient depth.
It’s all about money and power. The ideals of science are useless on that level. However, the big miscalculation the power-mad elites forget is, Nature doesn’t care a bit about their money and power. Legal, regulatory, and monetary constructs can’t overcome physical and natural laws. Sometimes reality bites.
Juice says:
March 15, 2011 at 12:40 pm
Until US nuke plants are threatened by tsunami, I don’t see the connection.
Do you see a connection in human inability to foresee all accident scenarios?
wsbriggs says:
March 15, 2011 at 12:51 pm
Even the minute bits of ash from coal fired plants aren’t the problem that melted fuel rods are.
It should be exceptionally easy for anyone to agree with that. What is mind boggling to the point of tears is that there are people who will not agree with it.
Legatus
Ya, things have gone just great in Japan. The last ditch effort of using sea water mixed with boron to cool rods in the reactors to keep them from runaway melting, while calling on help from the American designers, was just a fabulous testament to just how wonderful things are going there.
I don’t believe anybody when they say that because of this, nuclear power will lose its standing. If that was true, we would stop using coal after every coal mine collapse. Or oil after every gasline explosion, and so on.
The only people who are calling for an end to Nuclear power are the people who didn’t like it in the first place, and now think they have a reason to cry even more.
While the situation in Japan is tragic, lessons will be learned from this, new technology and safety systems will be developed, and life will go on and nuclear power will recover.
There is no advancement of life without risk. The same applies to energy. Think of the millions of people’s lives made better because of oil, coal, and nuclear development. Think of the lives saved due to these energy sources because people no longer freeze to death in the winter, or starve because they have no fuel to cook their food.
We didn’t stop selling the automobile after the first fatal car accident, nor did we stop selling alcohol after the first case of alcohol poisoning.
Bad events will occur, but society as a whole can grown and learn from these events. We just need to let cool minds prevail, and think rationally, not emotionally.
I did some checking yesterday and found out that the estimates of deaths caused every year to the production of fossil fuels for power generation dwarfs the total amount of deaths + radiation sickness cases from all the Nuclear Power incidents in history combined by a factor of 50 – 100 depending on which figures you use.
Time and again I see people talking about the “Safety” or lacktherof of Nuclear power yet I do not see the same fear mongering and “safety” fears on that side of the fence. You and others may get all miffed when you see people talking about the relative safety of Nuclear and go on about the danger, and how many people were exposed to radiation but from my side of the fence by overexaggerating the risks to such a degree and not having the same standard for all power generation you are saying you are fine with several hundred thousand people dying each year to bring fossil fuel sourced power because it’s only alternative scares you too much.
From where I am standing, it is one of the most ridiculous assertions I have seen come out of the disaster that is the Japan earthquake.
At present, there are 100 times as many deaths from the Earthquake and Tsunami that have nothing to do with the Nuclear Reactors and that figure is apparently going to jump to astronomical figures and all I see on the front page of the news is story after story about the Nuclear Reactors – which have already all achieved cold shutdown.
How about a little more attention to he thousands that have died in the disaster and a little less histrionics over the Nuclear Reactors.
John Coleman says: (March 15, 2011 at 12:34 pm)
I have written a blog on this topic
Which I read with real interest until I reached your words: “The consequence that bothers me from a radiation release instead of instant death, is the long term impact. People would breath in radioactive particles and those particles would become lodged in their bodies and years later a cancerous tumor would result.”
At that point our paths diverged and I left you to go on gathering nuts in May whilst I headed back to the main drag and some reality.
Here’s an interview with a Navy (ret) nuclear engineer that was also a nuclear power instructor. You will find more accurate assessment from him than a newspaper or blog:
Michael R
Considering the ratio of nuclear to fossil fuel plants your numbers are likely skewed.
Michael R says:
March 15, 2011 at 6:39 pm
several hundred thousand people dying each year
Man, where do you get that number from?
Michael R says:
March 15, 2011 at 6:39 pm
already all achieved cold shutdown.
Cold shutdown? Would you link the story that tells this?
Dave, God love ya, but you just blew any credibility you had with me going forward … you have NO idea of the energy requirements to air condition a house in Tejas in the summer …
.
Michael R
I’m not miffed.
Seems the Japanese are backing off their melting fuel rods. Can’t blame them, but going forward could get all wormwoody.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_JAPAN_EARTHQUAKE?SITE=CAANR&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Low cost, low sulpher, Australian coal is best for electrivity generation.
But then, I’m not in the least biased;
or not too much anyway.
I would, but, not everyone could drive (afford) a Mercedes (S-class) … my ’83 (European grey-market car) came equipped with airbags for instance, my ’85 Chev Caprice did not …
.
Anthony, when I first heard about the Japanese earthquake and tsunami, WUWT was the first place I turned to for information and commentary. You and the other commentors have, as usual, not let me down. I congratulate the level of discussion seen here.
I teach about nuclear power, in the context of twentieth century scientific technology and society, and will have to do a serious rewrite of the relevant lectures, but agree that the technology has held up well with an enviable safety record for the most part, especially US and Canadian designed reactors. There have been problems, but relative to other energy generating technologies, nuclear holds up well. I also borrow an analogy from Richard Rhodes, that nuclear power was commercialized way too quickly – imagine if airplane manufacturers tried to produce jumbo jets 15 years after the Wright Bros. first flew. Yet that is what happened with nuclear power. Even with the hasty exploitation of this new technology, it has held up well. I intend to continue defending this technology, and am delighted to learn from the experience of commentators here and from the information they have provided in the nuclear threads.
Hoser says:
March 15, 2011 at 6:18 pm
Monsanto had to end its terminator gene policy because that really crossed the line of food security; the terminator gene policy would have solidified opinion against GM crops and probably would have ended up in anti-trust action in the US. Indeed that was the most horrifying threat to food production ever imagined by a major corporation. However, had this genetically modified crop continued to be produced, probably the pollen of such plants would have been sterile, and would not have contaminated non-GM crops – except perhaps if it somehow lowered seed productivity through some biochemical interaction at the level of contact with the plant ovule. No fertile seeds would have resulted that farmers could have planted that would therefore be the target of Monsanto litigation.
The cross contamination of natural crops by Monsanto Roundup Ready pollen as you have described is indeed the cause of some dreadfully iniquitous lawsuits against farmers who are most likely innocent. Monsanto has used the worst strong-arm tactics of intimidation, spying and setting court trials in distant states, making the expense of defense too great for farmers to bear. Too many farmers have been driven into bankruptcy by Monsanto bully-boy tactics.
Jim says: [ … ]
I should have known better than to phrase it like that. But the fact is that current autos are better than those of 20 years ago. Progress marches on.
On a somewhat related note, anyone who wants protection provided by non-radioacitve pills can go here.
I already quoted the relevent passges but I shall also give you links – it is from TEPCO the power company that runs the reactors, there address is:
http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/index-e.html
They have been maintaining hourly updates on the 4 reactors and all have registered cold shutdown and have maintained that status for some time now:
Most recent status link:
http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/11031507-e.html
detailed status link:
http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/11031501-e.html