Newsbytes: Japan’s Tsunami Threatens The Global Warming Movement

Rick says:
March 16, 2011 at 9:36 am

Wait just a minute….what would a tsunami do to an offshore windfarm?
Not that anybody would really notice…..

Depends on the distance “offshore”. In many cases, the windfarm is far enough out that the tsunami (“harbor wave” by definition) isn’t much of a wave at all. I’d say unless the wind farm were on or next to the shore line, the impact would be minimal.

Crispin in Waterloo says:
March 16, 2011 at 9:36 am
It is unfortunate that the concept of ‘nuclear power stations’ is limited to pressurised light water reactors. They are risky and evidently dangerous when failing.
There are at least two competing nuclear technologies that have been proven to work and there would have been a drastically different outcome had either of them been used in Japan. I am of course referring to CANDU (U235) and Thorium-flouride reactors.

Of the two the Thorium reactors are the better bet as they fail safe and can be built small and modular. So in theory a roll out of Thorium reactors could be relatively rapid once the planning regulations are clarified as they are NOT PWRs or similar U235 designs that can melt down.
But emotional politicians both central and local government will be making these decisions egged on by an excitable and ignorant media – so one should not expect a sensible outcome.

I hope we are smart enough to realize that the events in Japan raise serious questions about the safety of nuclear power generation and I further hope that, once the dust has settled, we investigate those questions. This is simply common sense. We must not however entertain knee jerk responses on either side. These would fall into one of two categories. On the one side we already are hearing the protests against nuclear energy from the leftist greenies, protests that have simply gained in volume since the Japan earthquake, and are no more valid now that they were before. On the other hand we are hearing from the pro-nuclear forces that nuclear is safe, the system worked, no need for moratoriums, etc. and these too are hard to take seriously.
Yes, the events in Japan are so far from normal (8.9 quake with 23 foot tsunami) that it would have been miraculous had nothing gone wrong at any of the many reactors in Japan. And yes, the anti-nuclear folks seem to forget this fact.
But the events did in fact happen, and things did in fact go wrong at some of those reactors. The impact is yet to be fully understood. Given that, a little honest questioning is warranted. In examining these questions we will undoubtedly come up with even greater safety in the nuclear energy industry worldwide.
And BTW, I am pro-nuclear with some education in the area.

Sorry if my earlier comment is a little OT here. I’ve just been waiting too long to react to all the hype on the situation in Japan.

The increase in CO2 may be just what we need to save Gaia. Since global warming caused by the current level of CO2 is responsible the recent cold winters, it is obvious we need more GHGs to cause global warming to actually warm thereby returning our climate to its normal state. It’s a delicate balance.

I think this quote: “Environmentalists are trying to eliminate all the other alternatives, as well. All sources of energy pose some sort of risk or cost. Risk-free, cost-free energy is a complete myth and simply does not, and will not, exist. Groups that never propose realistic solutions are simply not worth taking seriously.” summarizes the Big Green organizations. There is currently no realistic alternative to today’s power production methods. Even at several times the cost, wind and solar will never provide more than 1/3 of the total. The lowest cost and safest are coal, gas, and nuclear.
Yes, I said safest, because when the emotional factor is removed, commercial nuclear power has among the safest track record of any major industry. My guess is that the Japanese (who are not technophobic as western governments are proving to be) will get the unaffected nuke plants at other locations back on line within a few months, and half of those affected by the tsunami back online within 2 years. At least two are toast, but that’s not a safety problem. Their two under construction may be delayed for a year as higher standards for earthquake and tsunami effects are incorporated.
There are currently 62 commercial nuke power plants under construction around the world, http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/reactors.html and I expect the completion dates will slip as a result of mother nature throwing disasters, but only the luddite nations will back away from making tomorrow a better place to live. Remember the words of Jerry Pournelle: “You can’t conserve your way to prosperity”
And finally, I do know that B. Obama campaigned for President on a platform of raising utility rates “necessarily skyrocket” to get expensive alternative energy into the US mix. Creates Green jobs don’t ya know.

ShrNfr says:
March 16, 2011 at 9:50 am
Hey, can we all ride around in 40 year old cars and shut down the modern car industry if we have an accident? I am not sorry to see the old designs taken off line, nor am I sorry to see AGW pumpers succumb to to reality, but really now.
——————————
Perhaps I missed your point, but the reason we are all “driving 40 year old cars” is because the government has decreed we are not allowed to build newer, safer ones anywhere. As mentioned above, the newer generation Thorium designs sound very promising, but as soon as the word “nuclear” is mentioned, the environmentalist scream and the politicians run for cover. With the information I’ve found, it’s my opinion that it was very unfortunate that the Thorium design lost out at the time for military reasons.
Unfortunately, it is going to take a long time to address all of the mis-information out there.

It keeps getting lost in the discussion that the problems at Fukushimi happened after a 9.0 earthquake, a Tsunami, and then several days of almost continuous 6.0 – 7+ Richter scale earthquakes that the plants have had problems. This in the middle of massive devastation to the surrounding infrastructure and emergency support that would normally be aiding in handling such a crisis.
The fact that the damage is this minor is a testament to just how well these things were built. There are problems but not nearly to the extent the media is hyping the problems. It should be noted that a lot of the so called ‘experts’ who are getting air time are active in the anti nuclear movement and taking advantage of this to push their view point of how dangerous nuclear is.

As a retired engineer (albeit in a different field) one must try to look at the bright side of events. Historically, all engineering improvements have been made for one of two reasons, reducing costs or improving design as a result of accidents. Look at virtually any activity from coal mining to bridge building, from shipping to aviation, all major improvements have been as a result of disasters. We have yet to learn of the number of deaths/injuries that have been caused by failures at the nuclear plant, as distinct from those caused by the earthquake and tsunami, but I suspect that they will be quite low compared with some past disasters.
The plant has now been stress tested to an extent that would never normally have been possible. To use the hackneyed phrase “lessons will be learnt”, but as in the case of the Tay Bridge, the Titanic and the Comet disasters, the Japanese disaster should not be an end of nuclear power engineering but an impetus to produce better safer designs.

Just to add to the misery in Japan, it’s snowing in the area too!

I must applaud the Germans for guarding their nuclear units against tsunamis in central Europe by shutting down seven of them and costing a few billion Euros. Way to go for being proactive! /sarc off