Half life: Nuclear Power

From the Economist: Half life: Nuclear Power

The nuclear industry is predicting a rapid expansion—but that will not happen without government help

“NUCLEAR has to be part of the energy mix,” insists Claude Mandil, the head of the International Energy Agency (IEA), a think-tank-cum-watchdog for power-hungry countries. He was speaking at the launch this week of a report that overturned the IEA's previously pessimistic view of the prospects for nuclear power. It now estimates that nuclear generation will grow by at least 13% by 2030, and perhaps as much as 40%. The firms that build nuclear plants are making similarly rosy projections. The nuclear division of General Electric (GE), an American conglomerate, predicts that 66 gigawatts of new capacity—equivalent to the output of about 44 big reactors—will be ordered by 2020. Areva, a French nuclear firm, foresees 130 new plants by 2030.

There are several reasons for this optimism. The prices of rival power sources, including coal and natural gas, have risen dramatically in recent years. At current levels, the IEA calculates, nuclear power is cheaper than gas and almost as cheap as coal. Unlike such fossil fuels, which release climate-changing carbon dioxide when burnt, nuclear power is “carbon free”. Better yet, uranium comes from stable countries such as Canada and Australia, so interruptions to supplies are unlikely. GE, Areva and another rival, Westinghouse, are also touting new designs that they say are safer than existing nuclear plants….


Comments

3 responses to “Half life: Nuclear Power”

  1. Dana Ames Avatar
    Dana Ames

    What do you do with the spent fuel? It is dangerous for a very long time. I can’t get past that- major objection to nuclear power.
    Dana

  2. “It is dangerous for a very long time.”
    Details, Details!!! *grin*
    I am with you. However, I don’t know if you saw my post about green nuclear back on August 26.
    “What if we could build a nuclear reactor that offered no possibility of a meltdown, generated its power inexpensively, created no weapons-grade by-products, and burnt up existing high-level waste as well as old nuclear weapon stockpiles? And what if the waste produced by such a reactor was radioactive for a mere few hundred years rather than tens of thousands? It may sound too good to be true, but such a reactor is indeed possible, and a number of teams around the world are now working to make it a reality. What makes this incredible reactor so different is its fuel source: thorium.”
    That I could live with.

  3. Dana Ames Avatar
    Dana Ames

    Me too.
    Get some rest.
    D.

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Kruse Kronicle

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading