Please share far and wide!

Search This Blog

Friday, February 6, 2015

On Nuclear, First What is the First Test? And Then The Second Tests of Costs and Risks?

In response to a ProNuke article which states that we are foolhardy for not ramping up nuclear fast to  "save the world".

I had this to say:

This would be a useful discussion if :

1) There was global warming at this time, there hasn't been for 18 years.
2) Manmade CO2 was a large and proven contributor to global warming

Neither one is true, both would need to be true in order to even consider nuclear.
If both were true, which neither are true, then considering nuclear would have to consider the

1) Extremely high cost of nuclear in relation to other power supplies
2) Radiation damage to the environment due to standard ongoing releases which are a normal part of plant operation.
3) Radiation damage to humans, the societal cost of lost production during treatment of disease, cost of treatment of disease, psychological cost.    What is the cost of permanent damage to the humane genome?
4) Cost of nuclear plant disasters.    It cost Russia their country, now we are on the verge of WW3 as Russia tries to get a piece of their country back.     Japan, will lose 10% of their GDP for 10 year, and permanently lose 10% of their country.     Japan will change in a significant way, even if they don't split up or get taken over.   It is estimated that the direct cost of Fukushima will be $600B to $1T.
5) Long term cost of storage the nuclear waste.     There really isn't any solution.    The only "solutions" in place bet on the human race not even being around for 100 more years.
6) Terrorist threat of spent fuel and plant attacks.
7) Terrorists getting used fuel and using it in a dirty bomb
8) EMP which takes down the grid and causes dozen of plants to melt down
9) CME from sun, aka Carrington event which takes down the grid and causes dozens of plants to melt down.

So if 1 and 2, were true....then we would have some serious spreadsheets to make to see if it was all "worth it".    But they are not, so just shut them down now, phase them out, there is a huge economic shot in the arm by dry casking all the used fuel and decommissioning the plants.   And it is good for us.

True data on global warming here:

True data on Sun spots via magnetism/cosmic ray/cloud nucleation as the real source of global temperature changes:

No comments:

Post a Comment

Insightful and Relevant if Irreverent Comments