Re: [Phys-l] Nuclear Reactors

[Hugh Haskell <hhaskell@mindspring.com>]

At 18:40 -0400 04/07/2009, LaMontagne, Bob wrote:
> It's amusing that the "renewable" people are just as "all or nothing" as
> the "fossil" people. That's why NOTHING is done.
If my only choice was coal or nuclear, I'd take nuclear. Coal is 
worse, except for the proliferation problem and the fact that nuclear 
waste lasts so bloody long and is so dangerous. But the damage coal 
is doing right now is definitely worse and in the immediate future, 
nuclear could be tolerated if it was the only choice.

Fortunately, we don't have to make that choice. The renewables are 
ready now, can be done incrementally so the effects can be seen 
almost immediately. I don't need all 1000 MW of my wind park 
installed before I can get the first watt out of it. Same with Solar 
PV and even some types of CST. Nuclear plants are going to take 
upwards of 10 years to get anything, and that is just too late. But 
the renewables do need to be accelerated even more. The sooner the 
better. If GM wants something to do between trips to Washington to 
beg for more handouts they could convert some of their idle auto 
plants to building wind turbines (the engineering is similar--a wind 
turbine is just a big transmission). Or maybe the folks at Chrysler 
could get a handout or two if they agreed that that would be a better 
investment than more cars that won't sell. Also wind turbines don't 
require specialized training to meet the special safety requirements 
that nuclear plants do, so the labor force is there essentially now.

Also fortunately, the debate over nuclear is mainly ideological. 
There will be few if any new nuclear plants built in this 
country--they're just too expensive. $10-$12B per reactor are the 
numbers that we are talking about here in the Southeast, where 
compliant legislatures and utilities commissions are falling all over 
themselves to approve whatever the local power companies want. But 
once the bills start coming in, I rather think that most of them will 
be cancelled, leaving the rate payers holding the bag, while the 
power company execs take the money and run.

But NOTHING is not what is being done. Wind and solar are building 
apace, and coal plants are being cancelled all over the place. As 
soon as the power company folks realize that nuclear isn't sexy any 
more, they'll quit driving for them, too.

I certainly agree that there is a group of anti-nuclear types who are 
ready to go back to ox-driven grist mills to avoid the possibility of 
a nuclear plant. But they are a small, if noisy, minority. I'm sure 
that there will be a few new nuclear plants started. Whether any of 
them is ever finished remains to be seen.

Hugh
--
Hugh Haskell
mailto:hugh@ieer.org
mailto:hhaskell@mindspring,.com

So-called "global warming" is just a secret ploy by wacko 
tree-huggers to make America energy independent, clean our air and 
water, improve the fuel efficiency of our vehicles, kick-start 
21st-century industries, and make our cities safer. Don't let them 
get away with it!!

					Chip Giller, Founder, Grist.org