Hire the French and Up-Nuke California! It's 2010!
Submitted by Willi Paul on Wed, 12/30/2009 - 15:20
Axis:Image:
Hire the French and Up-Nuke California! It's 2010!
A prominent French engineering company will help develop a nuclear power plant in California's Central Valley, even though state law forbids such facilities.
The company, Areva, said Tuesday that it has signed a letter of intent with a group of investors trying to build one or two nuclear reactors in either Fresno County or Madera County. The company will work with the investors to pick a location for the plant and apply for federal permits.
But the project still faces a high hurdle. California law forbids the construction of nuclear power plants in the state until the federal government opens a permanent storage facility for the waste. Legislation to overturn the ban died in the Assembly in 2007.
John Hutson, president of the investors group behind the project, said the group will apply for operating permits from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission even though the state ban remains in place. Public attitudes toward nuclear power are shifting, he said, and the 1976 moratorium may not last.
"We think the moratorium is going to take care of itself," said Hutson, president of Fresno Nuclear Energy Group, which was formed three years ago.
Hutson sees nuclear power as a key tool for lowering greenhouse gas emissions and fighting global warming, one of the state government's top priorities. Smaller measures, such as capturing methane from dairy farms, won't solve the problem, he said.
"You're not going to address global warming by addressing cow flatulence," Hutson said. "You're going to do it with nuclear power."
California has two nuclear power plants - Diablo Canyon on the Central Coast and San Onofre between Los Angeles and San Diego. Together, they produce roughly 15 percent of the state's electricity, according to the California Energy Commission.
Note:
Ralph Cavanagh of the environmental group NRDC called nuclear power "not a job-intensive use of money." He added, "Most of your money is going to equipment and a small number of operators. ... If you really want to create jobs, the best thing for Fresno would be to run a massive energy-efficiency campaign and cycle the dollars through Fresno's economy."
AND THIS: "Nuclear Renaissance" is only in the eye of nuclear operators...
There are numerous reasons why nuclear power is powerless against global warming. But the main reason is economical: nuclear power is just too costly, compared to other sources of energy. Looking at comprehensive building and operating costs, excluding decommissioning power plants, itself an extremely long and costly process, nuclear energy in 2009 costs upwards than $8,000/kWh. Add to that fact that no insurance company will insure a nuclear power plant... And add security costs borne by the State...
Second reason is length of construction time, measured in years, compared to weeks for some forms of energy. So many things can happen during those years that investors are loathe to make that type of investments.
Third reason is plain carbon math: while it is arguably correct to assume that today nuclear energy has a lower carbon footprint than gas, for example, that assumption only holds for a few decades. Current uranium global reserve estimates show that uranium mining footprint in 20 to 30 years will add to nuclear power so much carbon per kWh that using gas would be much better. And let us remind ourselves that in 2050, science tells we need to have nearly phased out carbon in order to preserve a planetary system our biology is used to...
There are other problems, even with Thorium, and even with theoretical fusion, the nuclear Graal, that make nuclear power a risky bet. Atmosphere ionization by leaking ionization radiation around nuclear power plants is one of them. The effect: stronger weather patterns, already stronger because of higher levels of heat trapped in the atmosphere. Krypton-85 release is another one.
And that's without even starting to mention nuclear waste, terrorism, dwindling knowledge, cost-cutting measures resulting in mistakes, plain human mistakes, etc.
Posted by Kim Davis, LinkedIn Groups; 12/31
• Group: Sustainability Professionals
• Subject: New comment (1) on "Nuclear power is mandatory and sustainable now, right?"
