+- +-

+-User

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 
Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Members
Total Members: 41
Latest: GWarnock
New This Month: 0
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Stats
Total Posts: 8438
Total Topics: 228
Most Online Today: 2
Most Online Ever: 52
(November 29, 2017, 04:04:44 am)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 0
Total: 0

Author Topic: Nuclear Insecurity Today  (Read 1527 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8243
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • View Profile
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
The Economic Failure of Nuclear Power and the Development of a Low-Carbon Electricity Future: Why Small Modular Reactors Are Part of the Problem, Not the Solution

Here's why he says SMR nuclear not only isn't part of the renewable energy equation, it actually undermines it:



1.•It won't be cheaper.

Like any significant technology leap SMR involves substantially more costs, from using more material per MW of capacity to establishing the infrastructure to design and build the reactors: up to $90 billion by 2020 to fund just two designs and assembly lines, he predicts. That's three-quarters of the total projected investment in all electricity generation — and of course it's far more than renewables' slice of that pie. And the flip side of this coin is subsidies. For 60 years nuclear has been deeply reliant upon vastly more subsidies than renewables have received, and it's still dependent upon them — except in the current scrutinous political climate many of the key ones for nuclear aren't on the table, from liability insurances and waste management to decommissioning, water use, and loan guarantees.

2 •The strategy is bad.
The aggressive deployment strategy being proposed for dozens of SMRs near population centers is reminiscent of the 'Great Bandwagon Market' of the 1960s-1980s when utilities ordered hundreds of reactors and ultimately cancelled more than half of them. That was followed by the 'nuclear renaissance' in the 2000s but only 10 percent of those planned reactors are under construction. Now SMR is in the spotlight, five years on and still on the drawing boards, with key developers Westinghouse and Babcock & Wilcox reigning in their SMR efforts (partly blaming low-cost natural gas) as they struggle to find customers and major investors. "It is always possible that nuclear power's fairy godmother will wave her magic wand over the technology and solve its economic, safety, and environmental problems," mused Cooper in an e-mail exchange, "but there is nothing in the 50-year history of commercial nuclear power that suggest this is anything but a fairy tale."


3 •Safety is not first.
Despite a raft of safety issues that SMR technologies have to overcome, proponents actually want pre-approvals, limited reviews, and reduced safety margins including staff and evacuation zones. With Fukushima still in the headlines three years later, good luck getting policymakers and regulators to agree to de-emphasize safety — as long as we're all reminded about it.


4 •What's best for the future?

The trend toward a more decentralized energy delivery system is the opposite direction from the passive one-way 24/7 baseload delivery model of a nuclear reactor. "Any resource that is not flexible becomes a burden on the system, rather than a benefit to it," said Cooper.

Billing SMR nuclear technology as more flexible and cheaper than larger reactors is an even better argument to support non-nuclear renewable energy options unencumbered by the same security, proliferation, and environmental risks, Cooper points out. 

But giving nuclear power a central role in current climate change policy will "not only drain away resources from the more promising alternatives, it would undermine the effort to create the physical and institutional infrastructure needed to support the emerging electricity systems based on renewables, distributed generation and intensive system and demand management."  >:(


Agelbert NOTE: The SMR is another poisonous cash cow for Nuke Pukes. Raise HELL if somebody wants to put one of those near you. And when I say NEAR you, I'm not kidding. The hype is to use them in NEIGHBORHOODS to provide "electricity security" and "reliable" RADIATION SICKNESS (whoops, I mean all the conveniences of a "modern" power source). When some NUKE PUKE recommends an SMR PIG, say ----> 


Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
73 Replies
3189 Views
Last post October 14, 2017, 07:10:14 pm
by AGelbert
4 Replies
566 Views
Last post September 04, 2014, 02:54:38 pm
by AGelbert
1 Replies
264 Views
Last post July 21, 2014, 10:29:36 pm
by AGelbert
0 Replies
130 Views
Last post March 02, 2015, 02:57:28 pm
by AGelbert
1 Replies
129 Views
Last post February 09, 2017, 07:52:40 pm
by AGelbert

+-Recent Topics

Global Warming is WITH US by AGelbert
Today at 12:39:13 am

Fossil Fuels: Degraded Democracy and Profit Over Planet Pollution by AGelbert
December 14, 2017, 10:49:12 pm

Key Historical Events ...THAT YOU MAY HAVE NEVER HEARD OF by AGelbert
December 14, 2017, 09:32:10 pm

The Big Picture of Renewable Energy Growth by AGelbert
December 14, 2017, 03:06:04 pm

Profiles in Courage by AGelbert
December 14, 2017, 02:32:07 pm

Wind Power by AGelbert
December 14, 2017, 02:03:19 pm

Pollution by AGelbert
December 14, 2017, 01:46:40 pm

Fibonacci Sequence: The Spiral of Life by AGelbert
December 14, 2017, 01:07:22 pm

Money by AGelbert
December 13, 2017, 09:30:16 pm

Darwin by AGelbert
December 13, 2017, 07:13:37 pm

Free Web Hit Counter By CSS HTML Tutorial