Nuclear Energy

Published on March 17th, 2011 | by Zachary Shahan

9

While Europe & China Put Nuclear Energy on Hold, Will U.S. Learn from the Catastrophe in Japan?

March 17th, 2011 by Zachary Shahan 

One of my readers recently commented on one of my posts: “Wow, you’re quite the news nerd.” Yes, I guess I am. I have been following cleantech news obsessively for awhile (not to mention environmental science, climate change, food, and animal news), in an effort to be the best cleantech blogger I can be. This, for me, includes cleantech breakthroughs, cleantech projects, cleantech business trends, and cleantech politics.

In the midst of the ongoing nuclear crisis in Japan, it has been interesting to see how the world’s leading countries and politicians are responding. If I had even an ounce of hope that Republicans could come around on energy policy in the face of this catastrophe, I think I completely lost it this week. I’ve given up on them,.. well, not all of them, not every single individual who identifies themselves as a Republican, but the Republican leaders in Congress who run the show and essentially order those lower in rank what to do. Mitch McConnell, the Senate’s leading Republican, said this week: “My thought is we ought not to make American domestic policy based on an event that happened in Japan.” (Yes, because Japan exists in a world with different natural laws than the U.S., right?…)

Senator Fred Upton has been trying to speed up the nuclear reactor permitting process for awhile now (I imagine with the complete support of McConnell). His argument: the Japanese permit them so much faster, why can’t we? Despite the fact that we have dozens of the exact same reactors as those that are facing meltdown in Japan, these guys think we shouldn’t pay any notice to what is happening there or let it influence our nuclear policies here (nevermind the hypocrisy)….

While these Republicans are more than willing to cut funding for renewable energy (in the name of “cutting waste”), but cutting the subsidies for nuclear and fossil fuels is out of the question. These old energy sources that only rule today because of the money the industries have accumulated over the past several decades and the intricate ways they are now linked to our government are, of course, the only ones not in need of reform.

Continue reading this rant on page 2 –>>

Keep up to date with all the hottest cleantech news by subscribing to our (free) cleantech newsletter, or keep an eye on sector-specific news by getting our (also free) solar energy newsletter, electric vehicle newsletter, or wind energy newsletter.

Google+

Zachary Shahan

Tags: Japan, japan nuclear, nuclear catastrophe, nuclear policy, nuclear politics

About the Author

Zachary Shahan spends most of his time here on CleanTechnica as the director/chief editor. Otherwise, he's probably enthusiastically fulfilling his duties as the director/editor of Solar Love, EV Obsession, Planetsave, or Bikocity. Zach is recognized globally as a solar energy, electric car, and wind energy expert. If you would like him to speak at a related conference or event, connect with him via social media. You can connect with Zach on any popular social networking site you like. Links to all of his main social media profiles are on ZacharyShahan.com.

Related Posts

World’s Largest Floating Solar Power Plant Announced By Kyocera →

European Offshore Wind Industry Looks Forward To Healthy 2015, Stark 2016 →

Asia Pacific Solar PV Market Set To Reach 10 GW Q4’14 →

EnergyTrend Places 2014 PV Demand At 44 GW, Expects 2015 To Top 50 GW →

• Nate Green

  Wind and solar energy have been built out because of large federal and state subsidies. This last year people thought the subsidies would disappear and new wind farm development crashed. With the technological innovation being reported for both of these they won’t need the subsidies for very long. GE has recently bought a new crane system that will significantly lower the cost for wind power. GE also believes their solar systems are close to being economically viable. My problem with both of these technologies is the power is hit or miss. If you put in sodium batteries to store the power that doubles the cost of the power produced. If you don’t have sodium batteries to store power then when the solar power or wind power isn’t available you have to use coal or natural gas. Aren’t we going to always have to have a backup power source? We also don’t have the power line network to be able to move power around the country when needed.

• Nate Green

  Wind power and solar power are not economically viable right now. In 5 to 10 years they will be economically viable but not right now. Republicans won’t support anything but nuclear energy so it is kind of futile to stalemate over policy forever. Congress should do what it can to make nuclear power safer and more affordable and that will make nuclear power more viable. Nuclear power however dangerous you think it is is still far better than coal power plants. They are making great advances in wind and solar power so I don’t think the government needs to support those industries. Natural gas will be the power plant of the future whether we like it or not. It is really cheap, abundant, and far cleaner than coal. Most of the new power plants planned are for natural gas. Nuclear power, solar, and wind will still be bit players in the future due to reliability and economic reasons.

  • http://zacharyshahan.com Zachary Shahan

    Nate, I have to say that I disagree with you on a number of points here.

    1) that wind and solar are not economically viable: wind and solar have grown tremendously in the last 10 years (http://earthandindustry.com/2011/03/cleantech-investment-rose-considerably-in-2010-since-2000/) and are definitely economically viable in many places. wind power is now cost-competitive with coal in a number of regions & some states are now supplying 20% to 25% of their electricity from wind power (http://cleantechnica.com/2011/01/10/u-s-wind-energy-2010-summary/). &, of course, we had the historic solar-nuclear cost crossover last year (http://cleantechnica.com/2010/08/01/historic-report-solar-energy-costs-now-lower-than-nuclear-energy/).

    2) the idea that wind and solar shouldn’t get support from the government is faulty for a number of reasons. A) wind and solar should are the most environmentally friendly and since the market doesn’t adequately account for externalities related to that, the government should step it. B) fossil fuels and nucelar get a ton of support from the government — unless that support is dropped (not going to happen probably), wind and solar should get support, too. C) wind and solar are still fast-developing “new” technologies and support from the government to help them mature is necessary. even Republicans support this idea.

    3) the environmental benefits of natural gas might have been grossly overstated (http://planetsave.com/2011/02/07/climate-benefits-of-natural-gas-overstated/) and while i think that won’t deter governments and industry from using it a ton more, i don’t think it is the “great” option it is made out to be. & public backlash may stunt its growth

    4) as far as nuclear being far better than coal, you may be true. but the fact that nuclear waste will last longer than humans have existed makes me hesitant to accept that claim.

• Nate Green

  Those nuclear power plants in Japan made it through a 9.0 earthquake and a tsunami and they still haven’t melted down. They have passed the test with flying colors if you ask me. The reactors shut down like they were supposed to. The backup power source was supposed to take over to cool the reactors but they were destroyed by the tsunami. The problem is they were too stupid to protect the generators. I like solar power and wind mills but they are not the solution to our problems. They are a bit player. Wind and solar are not reliable. Thus making us build a whole new network of high powered power lines to transport power around the coutry. Not to mention we would have to come up with thousands of sodium batteries to store the energy on a large scale. Nuclear power is the only legitimate answer to global warming.

  • http://zacharyshahan.com Zachary Shahan

    Nate, sorry, I disagree on a few points here. Nuclear waste will have to be safely stored for how much longer than humans have even existed? & how will we do so? There have been serious negative effects from the nuclear plant failures in Japan — to deny so either means you haven’t kept up with the story or you have chosen to ignore the significant problems it is causing for hundreds of thousands of people or more.

    reliability is a big issue that we see a lot of incorrect claims about — i’ll come back to that in a full post soon

• Pingback: March Madness in Congress – Planetsave.com: climate change and environmental news

• Pingback: Energy Professionals Get It, Why Can’t Our Political Leaders? – CleanTechnica: Cleantech innovation news and views

• paulo

  Great rant!

  • http://zacharyshahan.com Zachary Shahan

    

    I always wonder when I rant what kind of response I’ll get.. generally assume a negative one, so nice to get positive comments

    Thank You