Climate scientists finding a voice

Climate scientists finding a voice... regardless of whether the change is due to human activity or not, no one can deny scientific evidence that there is a climate change!: http://www.sciencealert.com.au/news/20122301-23035.html "Climate change has already contributed to the southward shift in the breeding distribution of some tropical bird species in WA.
A research compiled by the Conservation Council WA (CCWA) and Halfmoon Biosciences, demonstrates that the poleward movement of two dark tern species is in line with general predictions of global warming." .... http://www.physicstoday.org/resource/1/phtoad/v65/i2/p22_s1?bypassSSO=1 : "Receiving an email with a statement like “You should resign, and if you don’t, I’ll work to see that you are fired” or “I know where your kids go to school” would be unsettling enough. But they “pale compared to what other climate scientists are getting,” says Raymond Orbach, director of the Energy Institute at the University of Texas at Austin, at whom the first threat above was aimed.
Now climate scientists—in atmospheric physics and chemistry, geophysics, meteorology, hydrology, and oceanography, among other disciplines—have begun to fight back. “I think the community is finding a voice,” says Ben Santer of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, whose work has largely focused on identifying the human influence on global climate, and who once answered a late-night knock to find a dead rat on his doorstep." .... http://theenergycollective.com/josephromm/75958/climate-change-bringing-arctic-europe : "The probability of cold winters with much snow in Central Europe rises when the Arctic is covered by less sea ice in summer. Scientists of the Research Unit Potsdam of the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research in the Helmholtz Association have decrypted a mechanism in which a shrinking summertime sea ice cover changes the air pressure zones in the Arctic atmosphere and impacts our European winter weather. These results of a global climate analysis were recently published in a study in the scientific journal Tellus A." 

For consequences of climate change for Canada see for example: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2011-387 ... also: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/story/2012/01/12/mb-nasa-ecological-change-canada-manitoba.html "A new NASA study predicts massive ecological changes for Canada's Prairies and boreal regions by the year 2100. Those areas are in "hot spots" highly vulnerable to massive environmental changes this century due to global warming, the study states. Much of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba is predicted to see major shifts northward of plant and animal species." .... http://www.ec.gc.ca/eau-water/default.asp?lang=En&n=7958DB0A-1#how .... http://www.mefeedia.com/news/48156031 .... http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/11/111103081431.htm ..... http://humanitariannews.org/20120112/nasa-predicts-massive-climate-change-impact-canada .... also scientists believe that Decline in solar output unlikely to offset global warming: http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-01-decline-solar-output-offset-global.html

Companies pioneer new nuclear designs

Companies pioneer new nuclear designs: http://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201202/nucleardesign.cfm "Two relatively new nuclear companies, NuScale Power and TerraPower, are cooking up new reactor designs, and meeting new challenges along the way.
Modern light water reactors generate, on average, 1000 megawatts of energy. Medium reactors can dip down to 700 MW. Ideas for smaller reactors have always been around, but never made it past the drawing board, as they seemed reasonable  only for small, isolated markets. But in the late 2000s, the cost of large nuclear power plants began to grow unwieldy. Even large buyers were forced to make drastic financial bets on new reactors. So around  2009, the market changed its mind about small reactors."

Big uranium business for Saskatchewan via new deal with China

Big uranium business for Saskatchewan via new deal with China: http://www.globalregina.com/new+deal+with+china+means+big+uranium+business+for+saskatchewan/6442577639/story.html "Until now, Canada was shut out of selling its uranium directly to the largest consumer – China. The natural resource is used to generate nuclear power, and although nuclear energy only accounts for 10 per cent of China’s electricity, the country intends to increase its production by six times.
“The more nuclear power they generate the less reliant they’ll be on coal. So uranium in terms of Co2 will be a clean source of energy. It’s important in one of the fastest growing economies that our uranium will replace the need for more coal generation in China,” Wall said.
China has 14 nuclear power plants – 27 new ones are now under construction.
“That is enormous growth, growth we haven’t seen in the nuclear business since the 1970s, so these new units require uranium so that’s where we come in,” said Tim Gitzel, President and CEO of Cameco, one of the leading uranium producers in the world.
Uranium production in Saskatchewan is expected to double in the next five years."

Nuclear new build approved in U.S. for first time since 1978

Nuclear new build approved in U.S. for first time since 1978: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=first-new-nuclear-reactor-in-us-since-1978-approved "Years of shifting and smoothing Georgia red clay paid off today, as the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) voted to allow construction of two new nuclear reactors (pdf) at the Plant Vogtle nuclear power station near Augusta. Atlanta–based utility giant Southern Co. will soon have permission to complete construction and operate two AP1000 type nuclear reactors designed by Westinghouse.".... "A global revival of interest in nuclear power technology remains underway, despite the April 2011 meltdowns at Fukushima Daiichi in Japan. China is already building four AP1000s and more than 20 other reactors currently—and many other countries are considering new plant construction, from the Czech Republic to India.
But in the U.S., even just to maintain the current fleet of 104 reactors, which provide 20 percent of the nation's electricity supply, would require building as many replacement reactors by 2030. In fact, nuclear power production may shrink in the U.S. before it grows. Aging reactors, even with life extensions of another two decades, will begin to drop off the grid in coming years. "Twenty years is the blink of an eye for 100 gigawatts. The time is now to begin to deploy new nuclear," says David Christian, CEO of Virginia-based utility Dominion Generation, although his company has no plans to do so before the end of the decade. "We're in danger of missing that window.""... and here is the news in different news outlets: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS_Approval_for_first_nuclear_new_build_in_America_0902121.html , 

http://theenergycollective.com/ansorg/76189/nrc-issues-licenses-southern-s-vogtle-project , 

http://www.uraniumblog.com/2012/02/could-nrc-approval-of-nuclear-plant-spark-global-nuclear-renaissance.html

US is also looking into reactor lifespans of greater than 60 years: "The research is considered a priority for helping America meet its long-term objectives of energy and environmental security. While for now cheap gas prices make a new nuclear plant a risky investment in the USA, existing nuclear remains more than competitive and a very important contributor to the energy mix.
According to the authors, "Extending the operating lifetimes of current plants beyond 60 years and, where practical, making further improvements in their productivity is essential to realizing the administration's goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 80% below 1990 levels by the year 2050."" http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS_Is_there_life_after_sixty_0302121.html

Research reactors: ignored yet irreplaceable

A good read on research reactors: http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/2012/researchreactors.html
"They are small and do not produce energy for electricity production. But for over half a century, research reactors have been fostering scientific innovation and education in more than 50 countries around the world. They host ground-breaking experiments from the nuclear industry's best minds and serve as training centres for students and nuclear scientists of the future."... "
The primary purpose of these non-power reactors is to provide a neutron source for research and other purposes. Neutrons are mainly used for materials testing and the production of isotopes for medicine and industry. Their applications are very diverse, ranging from testing of airplane turbines, to detecting arsenic poisoning in a hair sample or producing life-saving isotopes.
In the decades ahead, research reactor programmes are expected to make yet greater contributions - particularly in education and training, basic research, materials science and nuclear medicine, these reactors will play important role in the development, advancement and transfer of these technologies to and among developing countries. The IAEA, for its part, is committed to support its Member States in developing and improving their research reactor programmes to foster technology exchange and innovation.
"Among the activities that the IAEA organizes to support research reactors are technical meetings, publications and projects, which include the supply of equipment, human skill development and the transfer of knowledge via fellowships, scientific visits and peer reviews," said Ed Bradley, Nuclear Engineer at the IAEA Research Reactor Section.
Recent initiatives focus on three key areas: medical isotope production; education and training; and neutron imaging applications."

Government of Canada is now looking for private interest in Chalk River Labs

Government of Canada is now looking for private interest in Chalk River Laboratories: at the end of the day it doesn't matter who runs the lab, the government or a private firm (CRNL Partners, comprising EnergySolutions Canada, SNC Lavalin, AMEC NSS, Kinectric and Wardrop, and a team from CH2M Hill Canada, Babcock and Wilcox and the Battelle Memorial Institute are potential interested companies), what matters is whether there is a vision, direction and commitment to make that vision a reality... without a new research reactor replacing the aging NRU reactor, there is no way the lab could make any meaningful contribution is any of nuclear R&D, isotope and neutron scattering... http://www.ottawacitizen.com/business/Federal+government+tests+private+interest+Chalk+River+labs/6127544/story.html "A 2009 review of AECL found, “the primary issue surrounding CRL’s future is not whether it can become a profitable, commercially viable enterprise, but whether its activities are focused, driven by innovation and managed optimally.” It recommended the government, “seek an operating and management partner with the capacity to contribute risk capital, build new export markets, while sharing in the benefits of any gains. alliances with the private sector and academia, and develop new commercial opportunities in the domestic and export markets, while sharing in the benefits of any gains.”"... this is the direct link to the NRCan's announcement today: http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/media-room/news-release/2012/18/3768

and this is the direct link to the Request for Expression of Interest (RFEOI) website with more details: "The purpose of the RFEOI is to seek non-binding expressions of interest to better inform the restructuring of the Laboratories. The intent is to use the information to: assess the willingness of respondents to participate in, invest in and/or manage the Laboratories (including some or all of the activities, technical expertise, and/or facilities and site infrastructure); understand potential opportunities for, and viability of, partnership models inside or outside of the current Crown corporation model; understand the relevant experience, capabilities and solutions that respondents may bring to the restructuring of the Laboratories; benefit from the experiences of organizations in other countries involved in the management or restructuring of nuclear S&T or radioactive waste management; assess potential opportunities to enhance radioactive waste management and decommissioning activities; measure respondent interest in S&T activities for and beyond direct support of the existing CANDU fleet; and, identify the needs of respondents in terms of information that would be required to engage in any future procurement opportunity." http://www.merx.com/English/SUPPLIER_Menu.asp?WCE=Show&TAB=1&PORTAL=MERX&State=7&id=PW-%24%24ZG-419-23695&src=osr&FED_ONLY=0&ACTION=&rowcount=&lastpage=&MoreResults=&PUBSORT=0&CLOSESORT=0&IS_SME=Y&hcode=gZRjpGL1aBYQv%2ffLT32Gvw%3d%3d

RIM founder gives $21M to science and math faculties at University of Waterloo

Wonderful news: RIM founder gives $21M to science and math faculties at University of Waterloo! They should write his words with gold and post them on the walls of where ever science policies/funding are being decided: "scientific research is key to innovation, which is needed more than ever.
"History has shown us that a relatively small investment in fundamental research in physics and in science today can lead to huge innovation tomorrow"" http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/arts-and-life/life/sci_tech/rim-founder-gives-21m-to-science-and-math-faculties-at-university-of-waterloo-138952774.html

Nuclear energy market gains momentum

Nuclear energy market gains momentum in the world: China, Finland, France, CEZ and more: http://theenergycollective.com/dan-yurman/75857/international-nuclear-markets-gain-momentum

Lessons to learn from Fukushima

What lessons could be learned from the events in Fukushima almost a year ago? This is a good read, the key is that nuclear industry requires a "clear, stable and long-term government policies", perhaps important lessons here also for Canada too: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/matt-bennett/fukushima-nuclear_b_1234077.html "Watching the coverage of the tsunami's impact on the Fukushima plant was undeniably frightening, and some now have concluded that nuclear energy is just too risky for use in the United States. We believe that the opposite is true: that it is far too risky for the U.S. not to keep nuclear energy as a significant part of our electric power mix.".... and "To get the renaissance fully back on track, the nuclear industry must have clear, stable and long-term government policies to tap the full potential of nuclear energy. That means that as we think about nuclear energy on the anniversary of Fukushima, we make sure that we are thinking about risk accurately and fully. If we do, we think a consensus can emerge behind a national energy policy that actively encourages the use of nuclear energy to provide safe, emissions-free electricity that helps drive economic growth."

G.E. ends bid to produce Technetium 99m

The solution seems to be simple, doesn't it? a new research reactor that replaces the aging NRU could supply medical isotopes for years to come, help Canada maintain and expand its expertise in nuclear R&D and neutron scattering for another 50 years... http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/07/science/ge-ends-bid-to-create-a-supply-of-technetium-99m.html

‎"Dr. Andrew J. Einstein, an assistant professor of clinical medicine at the Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, who testified before a Senate committee in 2008 about the isotope shortage, said supplies were adequate at the moment. But he drew a biblical analogy. “This is the seven years of plenty,” he said. “It certainly is time to be preparing for supply beyond Chalk River.” Dr. Einstein said that when tech 99 was not available, doctors could use substitutes, but that these gave the patient larger radiation doses or provided poorer image quality to the doctor. And for some uses, doctors can substitute PET scans, he said. But the equipment is in high demand for other procedures, and many medical facilities do not have it."