"How should we deal with the risk that nuclear power might cause our country to perish?

[kristopher]

"How should we deal with the risk that nuclear power might cause our country to perish?
This question is what led me to propose the creation of a society free from dependence on nuclear power."
-Naoto Kan Sept 2011

[indepat]

1. Like Scarlett, we'll worry about that

tomorrow. :patriot:

[kristopher]

4. Too bad Kan and Japan didn't have the luxury of a tomorrow that never arrives, eh?

Although they'd much rather the general public believe nuclear is finished in the postFukushima world, the reality is that the nuclear industry is pushing hard to get their market share back and grow it larger.

Nuclear power back from the cold

Sponsored by FLSmidth
10/02/2011
By Michael Richardson, For The Straits Times

....

It took several months to bring the nuclear crisis under control. Countries operating the world's 440 commercial reactors, and those with plans to use atomic power to generate electricity, paused to check safety and other risks. They had to ask whether nuclear energy was indeed more cost-effective than other alternatives, including renewable energy.

Initially, it seemed that the Fukushima incident might severely constrain the future growth of civilian nuclear power, which generates about 14 per cent of global electricity supply.

A number of advanced countries, including Germany, Italy, Belgium and Switzerland, have announced that they will phase out existing reactors and cancel plans for new ones. In South-east Asia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand either said they were no longer interested in nuclear technology or have indicated indefinite deferment of their nuclear plans.

However, after this period of reconsideration, it is clear that nuclear power is far from dead...

http://www.power-eng.com/news/2011/10/1512234779/nuclear-power-back-from-the-cold.html

[GliderGuider]

5. If it will take one more accident of this scale to finally do in the industry

We can at least live with the unhappy certainty that one will be along within the decade.

Corporate power is obstructing every attempt to move towards a sustainable future:
Big Nuke
Big Oil
Big Coal
Big Ag
Big Pharma
Big Banks

What could take them all out with one shot?
Oh yeah, Big Depression....

[kristopher]

6. Greedy bastards, aren't they?

The transition to renewables can drive the global economy for 30 years easily; and we are building the momentum for that at a rate very few appreciate.

[GliderGuider]

7. I expect that as long as money keeps flowing through the global economy

the current "Mr. Bigs" will stay in control. The only thing that will oust them from power is the removal of their lifeblood - money. This poses a conundrum for renewable energy, because the same forces that weaken the big players also make the growth of small players like wind power more difficult.

IMHO of course.

[kristopher]

8. That is true as far as it goes.

I've pointed it out many times myself. The part of the equation you lack and should look to is the developing world. While it is true that the "Mr. Bigs" have political and economic control of the energy systems in the developed world, remember that they inherited that position with infrastructure built and developed when a different set of technological and economic priorities ruled.

China is not under the control of the "MR. Bigs" you are referring to and is going its own way. Along with the innate superiority of renewables, the support of the developing nations acts as an extremely effective work-around to bring into being the infrastructure needed to break the stranglehold 1st world entrenched energy infrastructures has been maintaining with political influence. Remember, the new energy sources do not depend on fuel extraction - they are commodities like TVs and cars. Once their infrastructure is well enough developed, there is little to nothing the entrenched energy industries are going to be able to do to slow down the process of adoption.

I can't over emphasize the way China has taken global planners by surprise in this area.

[GliderGuider]

9. The world requires more than energy and technology to thrive.

China has very different issues than the industrial West. China is going to fall victim to a nasty combination of air, water and soil pollution, falling water tables, desertification and the loss of soil fertility. They will probably also face rising social unrest as the planned economy fails to address the growing ecological problems or satisfy consumer desires across a very large and diverse country. Plus many of their international customers are in increasing economic difficulty. Windmills don't address any of those issues.

I think China has about 20 years of rising prosperity left, after which it will probably crash more spectacularly than any other modern or modernizing nation.

[kristopher]

10. That goes to a previous discission

We've talked about the population trajectory that societies take as they achieve prosperity. The same incorrect assumptions you applied then are causing you to go astray with those predictions about China. In fact, we see it already as China is turning their attention to the negative environmental and quality of life issues that go with the initial to mid-stages of modernization.

Your assertion that "windmills don't address any of those issues" is simply not true; renewable energy deployment is, in fact, a vital element of driving the creation of surplus wealth that results in the societal changes needed to achieve a sustainable lifestyle. And that applies globally, not just in the developing nations.

[GliderGuider]

11. Increased prosperity is just a faster way to kill the planet.

The strictly human concepts of surplus wealth and waste are unknown in nature, and are at the root of the planet's troubles as well as our own. "Surplus wealth" is simply usable matter and energy that we sequester outside the natural flow of life processes. "Waste" is simply undesirable end products of human activity that are generally unusable by other life processes above the bacterial level.

Human modernization is not the answer to the planet's misery, it's the cause of it.

"Sustainable lifestyles" are impossible with seven billion people all aspiring to North American consumption levels. The trajectory of this civilization is taking us further away from toward sustainability even while we are already 50% into overshoot.

Your faith is as, as always, touchingly misplaced.

[saras]

2. Shortsighted consumerism. Definitely. Anything else will require you to face reality.

[madokie]

3. I've been saying from day one that we need to stop this failed attempt at free energy

it didn't pan out, plus its dangerous as hell and its time we stopped this biggest boondoggle known to man called nuclear energy. I really don't want to wait until we have a serious incident like what just happened in Japan before we do something. I've got family in most areas of the usa so the chances of one of them being affected when we do have that, 'it can't happen here' incident is pretty good. Stop this madness is what I say

rec
Add: I about forgot to rec this thread and I think its one that needs to be read by many