Nuclear's Next Round
> Nuclear's Next Round
> January 11, 2010
>
> Ken Silverstein
> EnergyBiz Insider
> Editor-in-Chief
>
> Respond to the editor.
> [email protected]
>
> Round One of the Copenhagen Accord is now finished. And so the real
> work must be done -- to hammer out the details on just how global
> temperatures can be kept in check. One issue that must be resolved is
> that of nuclear energy and the role it will play.
>
> Decision-makers are now challenged with how to cut the rate of
> greenhouse gas emissions while also becoming more self-reliant. As
> they gather in the coming months they will take into account that
> nuclear power has relatively few such releases associated with it
> while the uranium used to create the electricity is plentiful.
>
> "Independent analysis of climate change mitigation strategies
> internationally show that a substantial expansion of nuclear energy is
> needed to meet climate change goals in a manner that reduces the cost
> of energy to consumers," says the Nuclear Energy Institute. "These
> benefits are being expanded with more than 50 new reactors under
> construction."
>
> The debate is a heated one in many western nations. But most
> developing countries as well as those in Eastern Europe are either
> considering or developing such projects.
> Specifically, 57 are now underway while 430 more are proposed.
> Altogether,
> 436 reactors are producing 15 percent of the world's electricity, says
> the nuclear institute.
>
> Much of the current construction is in the Asian countries and
> especially in China where 20 are getting built and 32 more are
> expected to be up and running by 2020. In Eastern Europe polls show
> that a preponderance of the people favors nuclear construction.
>
> That growing acceptance forced negotiators during the Copenhagen
> conference to remove any exclusion on nuclear power. That means that
> countries can include nuclear power in their mitigation plans,
> however, no firm plans can be made unless a final agreement is
> realized. The next steps are for countries to meet in Bonn, Germany in
> June and in Mexico City at the end of 2010.
>
> Even the United States seems to be turning a corner where nuclear
> proponents have become less abrasive and more welcoming to different
> viewpoints. While neither the House nor the Senate climate change
> bills mention nuclear energy as a permissible technology to reduce
> emissions, the White House and Congress have allocated $18.5 billion
> in loan guarantees to four pending projects, and they have
> appropriated $40 billion to next-generation nuclear plants.
>
> According to the Nuclear Energy Institute, applications for 26 new
> nuclear units are now pending with federal regulators and of those, it
> is hoping that at least four will get built. That would be necessary
> not only to comply with expected clean air rules but also to meet the
> predicted increase in electricity demand of 20 percent by 2020.
>
> Future Factors
> Most in the environmental community -- but not all -- say that nuclear
> power's standing ought to be minimized. They are therefore working
> hard to ensure that it is not included in any permanent language in an
> international agreement that would ease emissions.
> Their arguments center on the safety of nuclear plants as well as the
> cost of building these plants. They are also asking how to store spent
> fuel and prevent such fuels from being diverted to make nuclear
> weapons.
> Those folks
> say that the only true clean energy comes from such sustainable
> energies as the wind, sun, geothermal and biofuels.
>
> "Even if there is further development of nuclear power, it will be far
> too slow because it takes 10 to 15 years to get a nuclear power plant
> at a point of producing electricity," says Sue Wareham, International
> Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, in an interview with the European
> news service IPS.
> "We need action faster than that."
>
> Despite the vigorous opposition, nuclear energy discussions have moved
> from the back rooms to the front halls where global warming talks are
> underway.
> The Group of Eight -- the world's most advanced economies -- have
> voiced support for the energy source provided that any future
> development abides by non-proliferation standards.
>
> Japan, for example, wants to supply 40 percent of its electricity mix
> with nuclear power by 2030. France, the global leader for nuclear,
> produces nearly 80 percent of its power through nuclear and is looking
> to augment that percentage. Meanwhile, other promising economies such
> as Russia and South Korea are increasing the position of nuclear power
> in their energy portfolios.
>
> Their rationale is that they must address the pressures to reduce
> their greenhouse gas emissions while also working to make their
> countries more energy independent. As such, nuclear energy could
> provide such a dual-purpose solution. To put the matter in
> perspective, 6.5 billion people exist today but by 2050, that number
> is expected to 9.2 billion. By the time that developing countries
> electrify, the need for energy will double.
>
> "The opposition is complex, but also politically and ideologically
> charged,"
> says George Koodray, president of Palmyra Media Group. "And, when you
> fold into that equation the political correctness of utility
> executives around the nation and their fear of the financial risk
> associated with the commitment to construction of a new nuclear plant,
> it all adds up to no movement with this technology."
>
> No doubt that the resistance to preventing a greater nuclear presence
> is intense. But that determination is running headfirst into an even
> more powerful force: a growing populace that will be demanding cleaner
> and more reliable energy. And those are the factors that negotiators
> of the next global climate treaty will have to consider.
>
> More information is available from Energy Central:
> The New Captain of the NRC: A Stillborn Nuclear Renaissance?,
> EnergyBiz, Sep/Oct 2009
> http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/energycentral/energybiz0909/index.php?
> starti
> d=70
>
>
> January 11, 2010
>
> Ken Silverstein
> EnergyBiz Insider
> Editor-in-Chief
>
> Respond to the editor.
> [email protected]
>
> Round One of the Copenhagen Accord is now finished. And so the real
> work must be done -- to hammer out the details on just how global
> temperatures can be kept in check. One issue that must be resolved is
> that of nuclear energy and the role it will play.
>
> Decision-makers are now challenged with how to cut the rate of
> greenhouse gas emissions while also becoming more self-reliant. As
> they gather in the coming months they will take into account that
> nuclear power has relatively few such releases associated with it
> while the uranium used to create the electricity is plentiful.
>
> "Independent analysis of climate change mitigation strategies
> internationally show that a substantial expansion of nuclear energy is
> needed to meet climate change goals in a manner that reduces the cost
> of energy to consumers," says the Nuclear Energy Institute. "These
> benefits are being expanded with more than 50 new reactors under
> construction."
>
> The debate is a heated one in many western nations. But most
> developing countries as well as those in Eastern Europe are either
> considering or developing such projects.
> Specifically, 57 are now underway while 430 more are proposed.
> Altogether,
> 436 reactors are producing 15 percent of the world's electricity, says
> the nuclear institute.
>
> Much of the current construction is in the Asian countries and
> especially in China where 20 are getting built and 32 more are
> expected to be up and running by 2020. In Eastern Europe polls show
> that a preponderance of the people favors nuclear construction.
>
> That growing acceptance forced negotiators during the Copenhagen
> conference to remove any exclusion on nuclear power. That means that
> countries can include nuclear power in their mitigation plans,
> however, no firm plans can be made unless a final agreement is
> realized. The next steps are for countries to meet in Bonn, Germany in
> June and in Mexico City at the end of 2010.
>
> Even the United States seems to be turning a corner where nuclear
> proponents have become less abrasive and more welcoming to different
> viewpoints. While neither the House nor the Senate climate change
> bills mention nuclear energy as a permissible technology to reduce
> emissions, the White House and Congress have allocated $18.5 billion
> in loan guarantees to four pending projects, and they have
> appropriated $40 billion to next-generation nuclear plants.
>
> According to the Nuclear Energy Institute, applications for 26 new
> nuclear units are now pending with federal regulators and of those, it
> is hoping that at least four will get built. That would be necessary
> not only to comply with expected clean air rules but also to meet the
> predicted increase in electricity demand of 20 percent by 2020.
>
> Future Factors
> Most in the environmental community -- but not all -- say that nuclear
> power's standing ought to be minimized. They are therefore working
> hard to ensure that it is not included in any permanent language in an
> international agreement that would ease emissions.
> Their arguments center on the safety of nuclear plants as well as the
> cost of building these plants. They are also asking how to store spent
> fuel and prevent such fuels from being diverted to make nuclear
> weapons.
> Those folks
> say that the only true clean energy comes from such sustainable
> energies as the wind, sun, geothermal and biofuels.
>
> "Even if there is further development of nuclear power, it will be far
> too slow because it takes 10 to 15 years to get a nuclear power plant
> at a point of producing electricity," says Sue Wareham, International
> Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, in an interview with the European
> news service IPS.
> "We need action faster than that."
>
> Despite the vigorous opposition, nuclear energy discussions have moved
> from the back rooms to the front halls where global warming talks are
> underway.
> The Group of Eight -- the world's most advanced economies -- have
> voiced support for the energy source provided that any future
> development abides by non-proliferation standards.
>
> Japan, for example, wants to supply 40 percent of its electricity mix
> with nuclear power by 2030. France, the global leader for nuclear,
> produces nearly 80 percent of its power through nuclear and is looking
> to augment that percentage. Meanwhile, other promising economies such
> as Russia and South Korea are increasing the position of nuclear power
> in their energy portfolios.
>
> Their rationale is that they must address the pressures to reduce
> their greenhouse gas emissions while also working to make their
> countries more energy independent. As such, nuclear energy could
> provide such a dual-purpose solution. To put the matter in
> perspective, 6.5 billion people exist today but by 2050, that number
> is expected to 9.2 billion. By the time that developing countries
> electrify, the need for energy will double.
>
> "The opposition is complex, but also politically and ideologically
> charged,"
> says George Koodray, president of Palmyra Media Group. "And, when you
> fold into that equation the political correctness of utility
> executives around the nation and their fear of the financial risk
> associated with the commitment to construction of a new nuclear plant,
> it all adds up to no movement with this technology."
>
> No doubt that the resistance to preventing a greater nuclear presence
> is intense. But that determination is running headfirst into an even
> more powerful force: a growing populace that will be demanding cleaner
> and more reliable energy. And those are the factors that negotiators
> of the next global climate treaty will have to consider.
>
> More information is available from Energy Central:
> The New Captain of the NRC: A Stillborn Nuclear Renaissance?,
> EnergyBiz, Sep/Oct 2009
> http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/energycentral/energybiz0909/index.php?
> starti
> d=70
>
>