Regarding climate change action, nuclear power is useless and irrelevant
Future Prospects…….. Can nuclear power grow as rapidly as desired by those advocating it to mitigate climate change? For that to happen, nuclear power would have to increase its share of global generation relative to sources that are proving more economically competitive, such as natural gas and renewables — and that in turn would require vastly accelerated and expanded reactor construction at prices that make sense relative to these other sources.
All of this is quite apart from the other well-known and widespread concerns about nuclear power: the potential for severe accidents, the linkage to nuclear weapons and the production of long-lived radioactive waste. These challenges will not disappear and indeed may only grow worse, which is why nuclear’s prospects as a significant climate change mitigator are feeble to nonexistent.
Nuclear Power Is No Fix for Climate, Energy Intelligence, M.V. Ramana27 November 2015
| As we approach this year’s climate talks in Paris, several policymakers and organizations dealing with energy have stated publicly that an expansion of nuclear power is needed to combat global warming. The Nuclear Energy Agency and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have argued on their websites that “to limit the rise in global mean temperatures to 2°C” nuclear energy has to increase its share of global electricity production from “11% in 2014 to 17% in 2050.”
What are the prospects of an expansion of nuclear power such that it increases its electricity market share by over 50% in about 35 years? The short answer is that they are slim at best. Several technical and economic challenges confront such a large and relatively rapid expansion of nuclear reactor construction; these challenges suggest that although nuclear power will remain part of electricity generation in several countries, its prospects for significant growth are limited. In addition, there are social problems; in particular, sustained public opposition in most countries around the world, a sentiment that was clearly apparent in 2011 after the multiple meltdowns at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant…….. As of November 2015, the IAEA reported a total of 441 “operational reactors” in 31 countries and Taiwan, with a combined generating capacity of nearly 382 gigawatts of electricity. However, not all of these “operational reactors” are necessarily operating. Apart from reactors that are shut down for routine maintenance or refueling, this count includes 43 reactors in Japan, only two of which are operating and generating electricity. Most of these reactors are concentrated in just a few countries — over half are in just four countries, if one counts the ones in Japan. The IAEA also lists 65 reactors under construction with a total capacity of over 64 GW. Some of these will likely never be completed (e.g. two reactors in Japan), and some have been under construction for lengthy periods of time — most notably the US Tennessee Valley Authority’s Watts Bar-2 which may see commercial operation next year after a 43-year on-again, off-again construction period……… As with the reactor fleet, construction is also concentrated in a few countries: China alone accounts for nearly a third of the reactors under construction, and, with Russia and India, comprises over half the total number. This growth, in particular China’s rapid pace of building nuclear plants, has led some to expect an increase in nuclear power’s market share. But this is not a valid conclusion for two reasons. First, China’s targets for nuclear power have declined significantly after Fukushima. In 2010, the official target for nuclear capacity in 2020 was 70 GW, and there were reports that it was or had been as high as 114 GW. The current target is 58 GW by 2020, and even meeting that lower target is a challenge. Second, China is not constructing only nuclear reactors, but also coal power plants, hydroelectric dams, wind turbines and solar plants at a tremendous rate. Hence, it is easy to see that nuclear power’s share of the electricity production in China — only 2.39% in 2014 — is unlikely to increase significantly for decades even if current Chinese nuclear plans go through without any further hitches. India’s nuclear share has also remained in the 2% to 4% rangefor a couple of decades. Its nuclear program, which dates back to the 1950s, is notable for ambitious expansion plans that have never been met and there are good reasons to expect the same in the future. For example, in 2010, the head of India’s Atomic Energy Commission projected a capacity of 35 GW by 2020. The current expectation is for a little over 10 GW of installed capacity by that time. In fact, even the IAEA, which historically has always been very optimistic about nuclear energy’s prospects, and which has as one of its objectives “to accelerate and enlarge the contribution of atomic energy,” has lowered its sights: : The latest of its projections for nuclear power’s share in 2030 ranges from 11.3% to 8.6%, with even lower projections for 2050. This is much lower than foreseen by the agency a decade ago, when it projected the nuclear share declining only to 15%-17% by 2020 and 13%-14% by 2030, and far lower than the 17% by 2050 target it claims is necessary for climate mitigation. This decline in future projections is a function of both anticipated reactor shutdowns due to aging and a reduced rate of construction of new reactors. Is Nuclear Power Competitive?…… Future Prospects…….. Can nuclear power grow as rapidly as desired by those advocating it to mitigate climate change? For that to happen, nuclear power would have to increase its share of global generation relative to sources that are proving more economically competitive, such as natural gas and renewables — and that in turn would require vastly accelerated and expanded reactor construction at prices that make sense relative to these other sources. All of this is quite apart from the other well-known and widespread concerns about nuclear power: the potential for severe accidents, the linkage to nuclear weapons and the production of long-lived radioactive waste. These challenges will not disappear and indeed may only grow worse, which is why nuclear’s prospects as a significant climate change mitigator are feeble to nonexistent…..http://www.energyintel.com/pages/worldopinionarticle.aspx?DocID=906841 |
Low Carbon Economy Expert Panel report – boost renewables, No to nuclear
Low Carbon Economy Expert Panel report recommends South Australia move quickly to 100 per cent green energy production, Sheradyn Holderhead Political Reporter The Advertiser November 25, 2015 SOUTH Australia should produce 100 per cent green energy “relatively quickly” using a mix of solar, wind and other sources but not a nuclear power station, a report recommends.
On releasing the Low Carbon Economy Expert Panel report today, Premier Jay Weatherill said the State Government would adopt a target of zero net carbon emissions by 2050.
But Mr Weatherill is yet to map out exactly how the state will reach that target, as the Government is still to respond to more detailed recommendations in the report.
They include:
SET a goal of 100 per cent renewable electricity within, a timeframe to be decided, that could be done relatively quickly, capitalising on the abundance of solar, wind, oceanic, geothermal and bioenergy resources.
EXPAND the state’s renewable energy generation to the point where a significant amount is exported interstate.
DEVELOP and manufacture cost-effective energy storage technology, which is critical for a stable renewable electricity supply and could also become a new industry for the state.
SIGN the Under 2 memorandum of understanding, making SA a part of the growing group of sub-national governments making a commitment to contribute to limiting global warming to 2°C.
CONSIDER implementing a state-based emissions trading scheme linked to California’s ETS, which could be politically and economically attractive to California and provide significant benefits for SA.
INTEGRATE curriculum in schools, universities and TAFE colleges about carbon pollution, green energy and related technologies.
The report also noted that nuclear power stations generally need to be of a certain size to be cost effective and should not be considered for use in smaller states such as SA.
Former Federal Liberal leader John Hewson headed the panel, which also included Anna Skarbek of ClimateWorks and Australian National University’s Frank Jotzo……http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/low-carbon-economy-expert-panel-report-recommends-south-australia-move-quickly-to-100-per-cent-green-energy-production/story-fni6uo1m-1227622467473
To climate and anti nuclear activists – a word of advice!
The Unreasonable Activist NOVEMBER 24, 2015 BY THESHITTYACTIVIST – by The Shitty Activist
If you’re an activist, probably one of the most common complaints you get is that you’re not being “reasonable.” That you’re refusing to see the other side. That you won’t compromise and find common ground with opponents.
I’d like to propose that not only isn’t “unreasonable” activism a bad thing, it’s essential to the long-term success of a given movement. Continue reading
Nuclear waste dump a threat to farming community
Nevada says national nuclear dump could harm farm community,Naples
Herald, By Associated PressNov 23, 2015 BY KEN RITTER LAS VEGAS (AP) — Radioactive well-water contamination could threaten some 1,400 people in a rural farming community if federal regulators allow the nation’s deadliest nuclear waste to be buried in the Nevada desert, state officials said in a report issued Friday.
A 53-page document submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission derides environmental assessments of the proposed Yucca Mountain repository as legally inadequate. It also characterizes the project itself as “an unworkable waste management plan at an unsafe repository site.”
“In the end, there are real people there,” said Robert Halstead, chief of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects and the top state official leading opposition to the project.
“That’s the thing about the way the NRC has approached the whole process,” Halstead said Friday. “Their maps imply there is no population there. They label it as the Amargosa desert.” Continue reading
Indonesian fires’ huge contribution to global warming
Indonesia: fires threaten to send even modest climate ambitions up in smoke The Conversation, Sonny Mumbunan, 26 Nov 15
Economist and research scientist at the Research Centre for Climate Change, University of Indonesia At the Paris climate negotiations, Indonesia will bring to the table a target of an unconditional 29% emissions reduction by 2030, increasing to 41% on condition of international assistance.
Indonesia’s emission reduction plan (or Intended Nationally Determined Contribution) is therefore slightly higher than its 2009 commitment to reduce emissions by 26% by 2020.
There are three problems with Indonesia’s INDC. The target is not ambitious; the plan is incoherent; and with the recent massive forest fires in Indonesia that have yet to be accounted for in the INDC it does not accurately reflect emissions for Indonesia.
Such a problematic INDC would affect the global efforts to adequately tackle climate change, since Indonesia is one of the biggest carbon emitters in the world. The forest fires have pushed the country into the top ranks of global greenhouse gas emitters……https://theconversation.com/indonesia-fires-threaten-to-send-even-modest-climate-ambitions-up-in-smoke-49155
Underground nuclear waste storage in rock salt can leak to groundwater
“our discovery encourages others to ask questions about the safety of current and future disposal sites.”
Nuclear waste storage sites in rock salt may be more vulnerable than 
previously thought, Phys Org November 26, 2015 Research from The University of Texas at Austin shows that rock salt, used by Germany and the United States as a subsurface container for radioactive waste, might not be as impermeable as thought or as capable of isolating nuclear waste from groundwater in the event that a capsule or storage vessel failed.
A team of researchers from the university has used field testing and 3-D micro-CT imaging of laboratory experiments to show that rock salt can become permeable. Their findings, published in the Nov. 27 issue of Science, has implications for oil and gas operations, and, most notably, nuclear waste storage. The team includes researchers from the university’s Cockrell School of Engineering and Jackson School of Geosciences. Continue reading
Pope calls for climate summit success, meets Muslim leaders
Pope Francis says failure of climate summit would be catastrophic, Guardian 26 Nov 15
Pope meets Muslim and other religious leaders in Nairobi to call for success at the Paris summit and for greater environmental protections in Africa. World leaders must reach a historic agreement to fight climate change and poverty at coming talks in Paris, facing the stark choice to either “improve or destroy the environment”, Pope Francis said in Africa on Thursday.
Francis chose his first visit to the world’s poorest continent to issue a clarion call for the success of the two-week summit, known as COP21, that starts on Monday in the French capital still reeling from attacks that killed 130 people and were claimed by Islamic State.
In a long address in Spanish at the United Nations regional office, Francis said it would be “catastrophic” if particular interests prevailed over the common good of people and the planet or if the conference were manipulated by business interests. Continue reading
Residents near proposed Northern Territory nuclear dump site will oppose it
questions about what kind of intermediate-level waste would be stored 15 kilometres from their house and garden have not been answered.
“Originally it was just low-level and then they brought in intermediate and when we queried what intermediate was we couldn’t get an answer,” Mr Rossignol said.
“Then halfway through a conversation they said intermediate and low level,” he said.
Neighbours of proposed NT nuclear waste dump upset at ‘lack of consultation‘ http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-25/neighbours-of-proposed-nuclear-dump-upset-lack-of-consultation/6972048 By Rosa Ellen Neighbours to a proposed nuclear waste site south of Alice Springs are upset they were not consulted by the property’s owner and say they will oppose it.
The Aridgold date farm in Hale, 75 kilometres from Alice Springs, is one of six sites shortlisted to house the country’s low-to-intermediate level radioactive waste.
Bordering the date farm is a land trust made up of three homesteads, the closest of which is the Oak Valley Outstation owned by Mary Le Rossignol and her husband Robert, who are also traditional owners.
Ms Le Rossignol said she first heard Tim Micklem, their neighbour of 30 years, had nominated his property as the country’s next nuclear waste dump on ABC Local Radio.
“I was angry because we live right next door to him,” Ms Le Rossignol said. “It just hit me hard, because I honestly expected people to go around and talk to your neighbours and let them know what was going on.
“But that didn’t happen here.” Continue reading
Sallys Flat residents not consulted about nuclear waste dump proposal, want answers
Nuclear waste storage: Government officials grilled over proposal for historic village Sallys Flat , ABC News 26 Nov 15 Dozens of people have attended a community meeting to grill Federal Government officials over a proposal to store nuclear waste near a historic village in the Bathurst district in central west New South Wales.
Sallys Flat is one of six sites around Australia shortlisted by the Federal Government to host the country’s first permanent nuclear waste dump.
A community meeting is being held in Hill End today to discuss the possibility that the neighbouring village of Sallys Flat could be chosen to store the material.
The meeting, at Hill End’s Royal Hall, is the first chance locals have had to hear directly from Federal Government representatives about the decision to shortlist the site.
Commonwealth officials are due at the meeting to give residents a chance to find out more about the proposal.
Community in the dark, residents say
Neighbouring landowner Robyn Rayner said the entire community was in the dark about the proposal.
“To this day we have no information stating how it will affect us personally or the community as a whole,” Mrs Rayner said……http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-26/sallys-flat-nuclear-waste-site-proposal-meeting/6974808
The hypocrisy of Malcolm Turnbull and Greg Hunt at Paris climate summit
Paris 2015: Hunt says climate change action at Paris talks a ‘deeply personal
goal’
Clinching a global deal in Paris to keep global warming below two degrees is a “deeply personal goal” and climate change inaction is “not an option”, Environment Minister Greg Hunt is expected to say on Wednesday. – Sydney Morning Herald, 25/11/15
Don’t be a climate coward PM – Greens
The Greens have warned Malcolm Turnbull not to be a “climate coward” at global talks in Paris.
The prime minister had one last chance to prove he was not a weathervane on climate change like his predecessor Tony Abbott, Greens MP Adam Bandt told reporters in Canberra on Tuesday.
“He’s going to Paris with a big black rock around his neck,” he said, citing the government’s approval of the southern hemisphere’s biggest coal mine Adani Carmichael.http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2015/11/24/dont-be-climate-coward-pm-greens
Michael Brull: Before Adopting Them As PM, Malcolm Turnbull Called Bullsh*t On The Coalition’s Climate Change Plans
In 2010 Turnbull helped launched a report calling for a zero emissions future. He understands the threat climate change poses, he just doesn’t seem to care anymore
https://newmatilda.com/2015/11/24/before-adopting-them-as-pm-malcolm-turnbull-called-bullshit-on-the-coalitions-climate-change-plans/
‘Captain’s call’ plea as more CSIRO job cuts loom on eve of PM’s address to Paris climate summit Some of Australia’s leading climate research programs are under threat even as Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull prepares to address world leaders at next week’s global climate summit in Paris.
http://www.theage.com.au/environment/climate-change/captains-call-plea-as-more-csiro-job-cuts-loom-on-eve-of-paris-climate-summit-20151124-gl6jsy.html
Global warming may make Brazilian dam disaster much, much worse
Reduced river flows in Brazil, as global warming intensifies the drought there, mean more damage from a burst dam, scientists say.
NGOs and environmentalists are calling for a tightening-up of mining regulations, instead of present efforts to relax them.
For this, they blame the close relationship between mining companies and politicians. Last year, the companies were reported to have spent over US$7 million funding politicians’ election campaigns.
There is concern that, despite the River Doce disaster, the result of their lobbying could be a new mining code that benefits rather than regulates the sector.
Global warming speeds up as higher temperatures increase natural greenhouse emissions
According to Professor Bastviken this also means that any reductions in anthropogenic greenhouse emissions is a double victory, by both reducing the direct effect on warming, but also by preventing the feedback with increased natural emissions.
Global warming will be faster than expected http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/11/151126104037.htm November 26, 2015
- Source:
- Linköping Universitet
- Global warming will progress faster than what was previously believed. The reason is that greenhouse gas emissions that arise naturally are also affected by increased temperatures. This has been confirmed in a new study that measures natural methane emissions. Continue reading
Economics stack up well for the Greens’ renewable energy plans
The Greens’ plan for 90% renewables by 2030 sounds hard, but it stacks up, The Conversation, Andrew Blakers Director of the Centre for Sustainable Energy Systems (CSES) , Australian National University, November 24, 2015 The Australian Greens this weekend announced a target of 90% renewable electricity by 2030 – pledging to go further than Labor, which has already backed a target of 50%. How hard is it to reach these targets?The Abbott government made plain its dislike of renewable energy by reducing the renewable electricity target (RET) for 2020 to 33 terawatt hours (TWh) of new renewable electricity.
Under this target, about 24% of electricity will come from renewable sources in 2020, comprising existing renewables (mostly hydro-electricity with some biomass) and new renewables (mostly wind energy and photovoltaic (PV) solar energy). It’s straightforward to calculate the annual additions (gigawatts, GW) of wind and PV required to hit a 50% or 90% RET in 2030……..
The corresponding figures for Labor’s target of 50% by 2030 are 1.2 GW of PV and 0.8 GW of wind per year.
An achievable prospect
Labor’s target is a straightforward prospect. In years gone by, Australia has installed this much PV and wind in a year, and can readily do so again. It is not much more than the installation rate needed to meet the 2020 RET.
The Greens’ target, meanwhile, is about 2.5 times more challenging than Labor’s, but still readily achievable. The Australian Capital Territory and South Australia have shown the way by adding new renewable electricity capacity equivalent to 90% and 40% respectively of their annual electricity consumption – mostly over a period of about 5 years. There are no practical constraints in terms of land because of Australia’s vast solar and wind resources.
Australia’s electricity system is becoming increasingly renewable. Continue reading
Murdoch press dumps expert climate and renewable energy writer
Murdoch strikes again: The sad demise of Climate Spectator By Giles Parkinson on 25 November 2015The Murdoch media strikes again on climate change. And this one hurts.
In late 2009, then Business Spectator boss Alan Kohler was so rapt by the response to a daily column I wrote from the Copenhagen climate summit that he finally agreed to a suggestion I had been pushing for nearly two years – the creation of a specialised site that became Climate Spectator.
It became a powerful and influential voice about the emerging role of renewable energy technologies and the business impact of climate change, a role that was expanded, improved and enhanced when Tristan Edis took over as editor in early 2012.
Six years later, and just days before the world looks to repair the disastrous outcome of Copenhagen by trying to forge a new global deal in Paris, Climate Spectator has been shut down – an apparent victim of budget cuts and editorial indifference from its new owners, Rupert Murdoch’s News Ltd.
It’s unfortunate, and very sad. The Murdoch camp has sacrificed one of their most popular columnists in the Business Spectator stable; another media title has folded; and an important voice has been lost in a country where the majority of mainstream media (with a few notable exceptions) expresses an ignorance and a hostility to new technologies that is quite astounding.
Tristan Edis did a magnificent job holding the government and industry to account, countering the misconceptions peddled by the mainstream print, radio and TV media, and even puncturing a few of the wildest claims of the green lobby.
Environment minister Greg Hunt would often carry a dossier of Tristan’s writing to conferences and media events, just on the hope that he could leap on some perceived error in his columns. Tristan’s constant line has been that Direct Action is a load of cobblers and accounting tricks. There is nothing that Hunt has done to prove him wrong.
Tristan was forensic in his criticism of vested interests – the utilities and government policy in particular – and was fearless in his rubbishing of the nonsense written by influential stable-mates such as veteran columnist Terry McCrann and others on the Murdoch pay-roll.
Now, that platform, and the voice of many other fine contributors has been lost. That competition gave us at RenewEconomy some grief, but it was good for us because it kept us on our toes. Our challenge now is not to rest on our laurels, so we will continue to rely on our readers for support, encouragement, advice and criticism.
RenewEconomy will continue, with the support of our readers – averaging more than 200,000 a month – our advertisers, our partners, and our donors, some of whom happily transfer $5 a month – or more – as a sort of voluntary subscription. We thank all of you for that support.
In the short term, I’m off to Paris, along with 6,000 other journalists who applied (but only 3,000 got in). Like Copenhagen, it should be fascinating, and mighty important. And you can guess the line that the Murdoch media will take on it.
1 This month
of the week – Disrupting War & Militarism in Oceania. Active solidarity. Radical practice.
Antinuclear 