The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The arithmetic adds up to nuclear > Comments

The arithmetic adds up to nuclear : Comments

By Martin Nicholson, Tom Biegler and Barry Brook, published 13/12/2010

With the lowest carbon emissions of all the fit-for-service technologies, nuclear remains the cheapest solution at any carbon price.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All
The ~50 deaths registered by WHO for Chernobyl were of people who died during or shortly after the accident. So far there has been no evidence of the 4000 extra deaths they calculated using the deeply flawed linear no threshold (LNT) model of the effects of radiation exposure, let alone the absurd figures quoted from anti-nuclear sources.

Every so often the anti-nuclear movement comes out with one of these propaganda pieces such as 'Chernobyl: consequences of the catastrophe for people and the environment', and sometimes even induce respectable publishers to distribute it. It is nonetheless nonsense, and will remain so no matter who points to it as their bible.
Posted by Craig Schumacher, Monday, 13 December 2010 12:37:23 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Since it is actually energy rather than money that is required to build any of these technologies it will be interesting to see how declining fossil fuel availability will feed into these economic assessments. Of course, as fossil fuels become scarce their price will go up but then so will the prices of the technologies (including nuclear) that require the fossil fuel energy to be manufactured/built. I think that, in reality, you will see that none of these technologies will make economic sense because, with energy supply decreasing but population still expanding, energy will be prioritised to food growing and providing welfare for a population screaming for welfare handouts. The truth is that "civilization-as-usual-only-nuclear" is a dream based on cheap and abundant fossil fuel availability and we actually need a completely different way of viewing "progress" and our future if we are to retain those things which make our civilization remarkable (justice, universal education, healthcare, etc.).
Posted by michael_in_adelaide, Monday, 13 December 2010 1:26:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
@michael_in_adelaide:

No Michael, the energy required to construct and otherwise run nuclear power plants, including all stages of the fuel cycle, is only a small portion of the energy the plants generate. Nuclear energy can take over all those functions, including the synthesis of liquid fuels, should such be considered desireable for the continuation of BAU.
Posted by Craig Schumacher, Monday, 13 December 2010 1:34:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Maybe Craig - but you have to build the nuclear plant first before you can consume the energy it produces. What with the decade-long timelines for debating, permitting, building etc. we will be well into energy decline before any of this can be done. The competition from other areas to use the remaining available fossil fuel energy will make building of nuclear infrastructure in Australia very difficult while we remain moderately democratic. It is one thing to argue EROEI but you need to remember that there are upfront costs (an energy threshold if you will) that will probably be insurmountable. Indeed, with the current financial crisis due, in part, to our inabilithy to increase oil flow rates you can already see the problems that diminishing energy availability produces - getting finance for a nuclear project at the moment would be impossible and this will only worsen as energy decline proceeds.
Posted by michael_in_adelaide, Monday, 13 December 2010 2:02:08 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
One little thing there, Michale. You seem to be talking as if coal were not available, & able to fill the petroleum gap, if it really does occur this time.

I've been hearing that petrol would be exhausted within 10 years, for the last 30.

What we don't need is any more of this ridiculously highly subsidised "Micky Mouse" power these greenies want to foist upon us.

Heaven help us, save from the arts school dreamers.
Posted by Hasbeen, Monday, 13 December 2010 3:07:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Hasbeen,

It will take a lot longer than 10 years for the oil to "run out" but it does not need to in order to cause major economic disruption. Oil just needs to decrease in availability relative to demand since the economy connot tolerate more than a certain fraction of GDP going to pay for oil (about 6 or 7 percent). In any case, conventional crude oil peaked in 2006 (according to the IEA) and we should begin to see a rapid drop-off in availability from the current production plateau by 2015 (if not earlier - according to oil "Megaprojects analysis"). Coal is expected to peak sometime between next year (according to Patzek and Croft) and 2030 (according to EnergyWatch). Coal cannot substitute easily or completely for the lack of oil and difficulty in growing coal use will contribute to contracting of economic growth before coal peaks. So coal is not the solution to our economic woes - it may just slow the onset of pain.
Posted by michael_in_adelaide, Monday, 13 December 2010 3:25:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy