228 comments on DrumBeat: July 11, 2006
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Show without comments | PDF version
228 comments on DrumBeat: July 11, 2006
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
- Thanksgiving Open Campfire Thread
- How Relocalization Worked
- How to Set Up and Run a Bicycle Repair Company
TOD:Europe
- Unique Times -- and the Future
- Peak Gold, Easier to Model than Peak Oil? - Part I
- Carbon Capture and Storage
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- The Bullroarer - Friday 27th November 2009
- International Energy Agency calls 'Peak' on OECD Oil Demand
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- Early Warning
- The Energy Blog
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“Where ideas are concerned, America can be counted on to do one of two things: take a good idea and run it completely into the ground, or take a bad idea and run it completely into the ground.”
—George Carlin
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.










GAIA Host Collective
at least in the region I live in, the main opposition to nuclear power is the waste disposal question - and this cuts across essentially all political parties. (I wrote a bit about this in a comment below). Whether this disgust at creating such a long term environmental problem will be overcome by a desire to keep the lights on (plus lots and lots of lobbying by companies like Siemens) is an open question.
However, you are quite correct in assuming that Germans will happily buy nuclear generated electricity - EnBW is technically one of Germany's largest electrical companies, but it is actually owned by Electricite de France - and the French are massively nuclear in terms of generating electricity. Surprisingly, much of EnBW's electricity just magically appears, without anyone asking where it comes from - though it is not a secret. Better, recently a national Green political figure just joined EnBW's board - nothing like putting an environmentally sound face on a massive nuclear electrical generation company.
If anyone wishes to call the Germans hyprocritical NIMBY types, please be my guest - but also notice that France generally placed as many of its nuclear reactors as close to the German border as possible decades ago, so that if an accident happened, the wind might spare the French having to clean up the results.
Eurpeans are cynical, pragmatic, and always looking out for their own best interests. No wonder OPEC is complaining about how Europe is discriminating against oil through high taxation - it wasn't supposed to work that way in our modern globalized capitalist world. Everyone was just supposed to buy OPEC's oil until it ran out - which it isn't, by the way, according to OPEC.
If you are interested, by the way, Schroeder tried to sell off an old breeder facility to the Chinese - it was cancelled due to massive pressure, more or less equally balanced between domestic and international concerns.
Maybe the Swedes can pick up one unused breeder reactor cheap - something like 1.5 billion euros is the number I vaguely remember. The Germans are getting good at this shipping old industrial facilities to other places - old coal fired steel mills, coking plants, oil refineries (one near Karlsruhe was sent to India maybe 7 years ago). What the Germans aren't selling are the wind turbine production facilities or the solar cells fabs.
You may see a pattern here - dirty, old industrial facilities are being sold to countries without much concern about trivialities like air or water pollution, and cleaner alternatives are being built up.
Of course, there is a fair amount of doubt whether alternative energy forms like wind will actually be able to power an industrial society - and Germans do know their engineering. I too expect Germans to use some form of nuclear power in the future - I just doubt that it will resemble the dinosuar technology which is happily being revived by companies with excellent political connections.
No thanks, I would prefer one done with new calculations and lessons learned from previous builds. But I would not say no to a breeder in Sweden.
I like breeders.
But then again, I used to hang out with nuclear engineers, and perhaps they are biased.
The fact the technology is generally so bad (though different breeder designs have worked, even over years, it must be noted) is one reason the Germans wanted to get rid of theirs, actually.
Breeder reactors, producing ready made material for bombs, are opposed for reasons which go to one of the main problems with any nuclear program - you get more bang for your buck with nuclear than any other option. Just ask the Iranians or North Koreans or Pakistanis or ....
We have learned much from our (and others') mistakes with breeders.
My engineer friends and I may be all wet, but IMO, the time of the breeder is here and now.
Easy?
No.
Complex and expensive safeguards needed?
You bet.
Nevertheless, on a cost-benefit basis, when I do the numbers, breeders look good.
Other people start with different premises and come up with different numbers.
I could be quite wrong. But at least, please let us seriously consider breeders--along with wind, solar, old-fashiond nuclear power generation, coal sequestration, biofuels, and whatever else we can think of.
There is (obviously) no one "solution."
Silver BBs, not one silver bullet.
IMO, breeders are one more silver BB.
Nuclear could be an issue that unites the world, because it best results (in terms of costs and safety) will be reached if we achieve a much higher level of international cooperation. IMO the coming years will decide whether we will get there the easy way or the hard way.
We believe what we believe to a large extent based on who we talk to. From age 22 to 30, a majority of my friends were nuclear engineers and nuclear physicists working at the Lawrence Radiation Lab and also Livermore.
I'd be delighted to tell you some funny stories about Site 300, but the Fibbies (F.B.I.) already claim that my dossier exceeds 2,000 pages, and IMO, that is enough.
I have associated with a great many people: Mainly for that reason the Fibbies keep my prints on file and (probably) somehow monitor (most likely through the NSA) all of my TOD comments.
Ho hum.
I lived through the Joseph McCarthy and J. Edgar Hoover eras. Times now are way way way much better.
I leave it at 50/50 FBI incompetence or you making up a good story wishing that you are important. Truth or fiction, either way you write well.
Any intelligence service analyzing me are welcome to call if you wonder about anything. laughs
Intelligence is big business in the U.S. I asked the IRS agent for a favor in regard to finding out about my file. In return, I visited his mother in a nursing home and sang songs to her.
CANDU is a very safe design. Just a fuel hog (unimportant with used fuel) and low heat densities (smaller reactors).
The residual uranium and new plutonium once cleaned is still more reactive than the natural uranium which CANDUs are designed to use.
However, the CANDU is a sow of a reactor. I've worked on them and they are complicated, expensive, and low performance compared to modern light water reactors. Throughly engineered, I will say, but hardly of interest to US utilities given current and projected yellowcake and SWU costs.
Just design the CANDU to use a common Westinghouse or GE diameter fuel.
If fuel stays cheap, there will be limited appeal, I agree. But we have LOTS of "free fuel" and cheap thorium.
The U233 bred from Th could be used in LWR (perhaps 70% breeding factor). A solution to the uranium "shortage".
You bet.
Complex and expensive == Doomed to fail