skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Nuclear power: The only available solution to global warming
A good read: Nuclear power: The only available solution to global warming: http://www.physicstoday.org/daily_edition/points_of_view/nuclear_power_the_only_available_solution_to_global_warming
"New fission technologies not only eliminate the concerns about safety
and waste that plague today's reactors; they can also consume existing
nuclear waste.
Global warming, energy independence, water scarcity
and third-world economic growth are all amenable to a common, safe,
clean, cost-competitive and field-tested nuclear solution. Why isn’t
this solution universally embraced and implemented?
I suggest two
reasons. First, we humans respond much more strongly to dramatic events,
like earthquakes, violent weather and terrorist acts, than we do to
steady-state threats, such as auto accidents, medical errors and coal
particles. At a cost of $4 trillion, we started two wars in response to
the terrorist attacks of 9/11 that killed 2996. The death tolls in the
US from auto accidents (30000), medical errors (44000–200000), and coal
dust (13000) are not only higher, but also perennial. The gradual
character of carbon dioxide emissions and global warming is elevating
our “boiling frog” tendencies to an entirely new scale of danger.
Although the problem may not excite us, our pot is warming so quickly
that we must leap to survive.
A measure of the magnitude and
urgency of this challenge can be found in Bill Gates’ summary of his
wonderful TED lecture on this topic: Despite the time, effort and money
he has devoted to new vaccines and seeds, if he could be granted a
single wish for the coming decades, it would be for a practical,
CO2-free energy source. That explicit prioritization reflects his
awareness of an especially unfortunate feature of warming, that its
burden falls most heavily on the politically voiceless poor, and less
heavily on those with the means to address the challenge. The disparity
adds to our inertia.
The second reason lies in deeply entrenched
myths (which for my purposes I shall define as untruths breeding
complacency), rooted in unrealistically high expectations for renewable
energy and unrealistically negative expectations for nuclear power.
Criticism of nuclear power focuses on history and ignores dramatic
advances in fission technology. This incomplete picture gives rise to
myths that conflict directly with the assertions of Gates and of John
Parmentola, the US army's director of research and laboratory
management: that nuclear fission is the only “practical” solution in
view.
The remainder of this essay comments on Gates’ criteria for
“practicality,” and examines the factors of availability, reliability,
cost, scale, safety, proliferation and waste. The good news is that new
fission technologies make fission clean, safe, competitively
inexpensive, and resistant to terrorism. Moreover, they solve the
nuclear-waste challenge. One technology claims to reduce the high-level
waste output of a typical power plant from 20 tons per year to a few
kilograms. American startups are pursuing commercialization, but much of
the action is in other countries, notably China and India. "
No comments:
Post a Comment