Nuclear power prospects uncertain: Worldwatch Institute

[jpak]

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2008/07/13/stories/2008071351240300.htm

Worsening energy crunch, rising fossil fuel prices and environmental concerns, and in turn their combined impact on global economic growth, have trained attention on energy options including renewables and nuclear.

While renewable energy generation is picking up rapidly, the prospects for nuclear energy remain uncertain, according to Worldwatch Institute, a Washington DC-based independent research organisation. Global nuclear power capacity grew by less than 2,000 MW in 2007, a figure equivalent to just one-tenth of the new wind power installed globally last year, the institute said in a new report.

Global nuclear capacity stands at 372,000 MW, but ranks as the slowest growing energy source–just 0.5 per cent in 2007, compared to wind at 2.7 per cent. By the end of 2007, some 34 nuclear reactors were being built worldwide, 12of which had been under construction for 20 years or more, the report pointed out, adding, Asia accounts for the most nuclear power plant construction with 20 new reactors currently under way.

India and China each have six reactors under construction, accounting for 8,130 MW, or more than a quarter of the nuclear capacity currently being built worldwide. More than 124 reactors have been retired by the commercial nuclear industry since 1964, amounting to a total of 36,800 MW of generating capacity.

<more>

[madokie]

1. What do they do with the retired plants?

Can the metals that were used in the building of them be recycled or are they just left to rust away? Is there a big reactor in the sky somewhere where they all go to once they are too old and die. But seriously what becomes of the materials that makes up the plants, and the site itself is it reuseable or is it just considered no mans land now?

Please no crickets

[NNadir]

2. I know the answer to this question, but I should ask you coal apologists first

what do you do with your rotted coal plants?

How about your tens of kilometer swaths of coal pits?

Do you actually believe that if you get Amory Lovins to greenwash them - when he knows as little about energy as you do - that suddenly they go away.

Do you know shit from shinola about the fate of metals in <em>coal</em> plants. How about the ones in the fuel, the metals that go up the stack as aerosols? Couldn't care less, oblivious to your ignorance of this subject.

In fact, you are coming here to confess ignorance and then assuming that everyone must be as ignorant of the subject as you and your coal apologist buddies are.

The first nuclear plant was built at Shippinport in PA. The reactor has long been shut and dismantled. You could look up the fate of that site, but that would involve something than specious innuendo, and we couldn't have that, could we?

As I say, I know exactly what to do with old reactors, but in order to explain it, I would have to be talking to someone who knew some science. ZERO anti-nukes qualify.

Let's be clear. You know ZERO about the chemistry of metals, zero about metallurgy, ZERO about how power plants work and ZERO about the risks of energy technology. You have produced zero indication that you even know what zirconium is, and yet you come here, "wondering..."

For what purpose do you "wonder?" Because you want to learn something? Not at all...

What you come here to do is to assume stupidity.

You couldn't care less what is done with old coal plants, and are not even remotely informed to consider what the consequences of 50 to 100 years of molten salt interactions with these plants might have meant to their environmental impact.

In fact, whenever an anti-nuke discusses nuclear energy, he or she is discussing a subject about which he or she knows ZERO period and is proceeding from, through and in favor of ignorance.

Ignorance is not passive. Ignorance is not neutral. Ignorance has moral implications. Ignorance kills.

[kristopher]

3. Right, so we should jumo out of the coal fire and into the nuclear furnace.

Your thinking is a bit addled.

[madokie]

4. So in other words your answer is the same as it always is, 'crickets'

You have an idea of what to do with the decommissioned nuclear plants and its the same as what to do with the thousands of tons of nuclear waste that has accumulated up to this point, nothing. To be a pro nukie, like you so fervently are and the fact you cannot tell me where or what to do with the waste indicates to me you must be hoping for Armageddon. When jebus comes and takes you up into the sky and away into the tomorrows of paved golden streets and no need of any energy whatsoever because your God, which apparently there is a lot of them btw, is going to provide all that for you. It won't matter if there is an uninhabitable planet down here due to radioactive waste or not because you, yourself is going to be in heaven with the rest of the believers. Well I don't have a God and I don't believe in a God so I have real concerns about what to do with all the waste we have now and will fight tooth and nail to limit the creation of any more. We pretty much put an end to the widespread use of nuclear power once and all of us are ready to do the same again. All I need to know about nuclear energy at this point is let the people whose training and expertise is Nuclear energy guide me and the direction they are guiding me is to no more nukes. You there nnadir have no more idea as to what to do with the waste than my dog does. The difference between you and I is I am not going to come on a public message board and try to tell everyone I am something I'm not whereas you on the other hand is going to come here and make all kinds of claims about how fucking smart you are but yet when you are questioned all you have in your bag of tricks is a few words and a whole lot of bullshit. The lies you've told here alone is enough to choke the average person but you the yellowcake eater and inventor that you claim to be are simply immune to that I guess. This old adage comes readily to mind when I read one of your post, if you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance then baffle 'em with bullshit. That, dude, is you in a nutshell. Now go piss up a rope for all I care.

My mother had a saying that fits you to a tee. If I could buy you for what you're worth and then sell you for what you think you're worth I'd be a millionaire.
No matter what you or the few others here say nuclear energy will never be the worlds primary source of energy. Its just too damn dangerous. If the pro nukers would fess up to the fact that you have no answers, viable ones that is, as to contain all this with no harm then we would have given you all the green light years ago, you can't, you didn't, so we didn't and we won't.

Oh they sell that rope you need at the farm and ranch tack stores, you can buy it by the foot or yard, it all just depends on how far up that rope you think you can piss.

Does anyone else here have any answers to my original questions if you do I and many others I'm sure would like to hear them. If on the other hand all you have is more of nnadirs type shit then don't bother, I won't be listening to it.

What do they do with the retired plants?
Can the metals that were used in the building of them be recycled or are they just left to rust away? Is there a big reactor in the sky somewhere where they all go to once they are too old and die. But seriously what becomes of the materials that makes up the plants, and the site itself is it reusable or is it just considered no mans land now?

I have a question for you nnadir, if you are so fucking intelligent then why can't you explain your position without being so stupid as to think that personal attacks are explanations? Stupid people resort to name calling cause thats all they have. Float some of your ideas as to what to do with the waste and lets have some discussion on that on its merits not on calling me or anyone else names.

In other word your bullshit is wearing mighty thin with me. DUDE