The Viability of Germany’s Energiewende: Mark Jacobson Answers 3 Questions

[PamW]

12. Why didn't Japan build their own airliners instead of buying from Boeing / Airbus?

kris,

Why didn't Japan build their own airliners instead of buying from Boeing / Airbus.

Because Japan didn't build their own airliners; does that mean that Japanese engineers are no good? Of course not. Countries do LOTS of things for different reasons; and you can't draw conclusions from those.

Monju was NOT an IFR. It superficially may resemble one; but is not; any more than a Cessna 172 is not a Boeing 777 just because they both have wings.

I don't see how you can call what Dr. Till is saying as "hype". Argonne demonstrated the technology. As Dr. Till stated; Argonne built the prototype Integral Fast Reactor at their site in Idaho; and they placed it through the accident scenarios that Dr. Till explained. The prototype reactor passed the test. The Laws of Physics don't "hype". If an IFR reactor in Idaho passes the test; then an identical reactor in California, or Japan, or where ever will pass the same test.

Argonne also built the reprocessing facilities at Idaho also for reprocessing fuel from the IFR prototype. Again, if it works in Idaho, it will work anywhere else.

Unless Japan licensed the technology from the USA; they'd have to develop it themselves, and didn't. They continued to license the BWR design from GE. I can't draw conclusion as to what reasoning was going on in their heads.

However, I can't ( and I don't think any one else can ) make conclusions as to why the Japanese didn't embark on a research program along the lines of the IFR program and just kept buying GE BWRs; any more than I can conclude why they didn't design / manufacture their own airliners as opposed to buying from Boeing or Airbus.

Do you have any evidence that Dr. Till or I are withholding information as to the complexity of IFR? Dr. Till and I can point to the tests that the IFR passed? Do you know of a test done on the IFR prototype in Idaho that melted down and we or somebody hid that information?

As a scientist, with the list of degrees and the certification of specialize knowledge in the field; I see the IFR technology as less problematic than you do.

I also see problems with the alternatives that you propose. I realize, as does the National Academy of Science; that generators have to "load follow", they have to "track" the load. That means one needs a way to "throttle" the generators. I don't know how to tell Mother Nature to make the wind blow harder or to make the sun shine brighter. I see problems with what you propose that are WAY, WAY beyond any problems with IFR technology.

Again, what engineering degrees do you have to support the conclusion you are drawing?

The good thing about science is that it is true, whether or not you believe in it.
--Neil deGrasse Tyson

PamW