Discuss: Reasons Not to Glow

That is one of the best analysis I have ever read on the nuclear power dilema

We are having a problem out here in the western USA.  (WASH/OREGON). A group in Astoria, Oregon called “Rivervision” is actively campaining against the installation if a plant on the great Columbia River which would convert frozen imported natutral gas to a more natural form to be shipped to “wherever “in the country it wants send it. We people here call the group NO “LGN”. This LGN proposal if implemented would change the river we all love so much and and forever make it a complete tragedy, to say the least. It would sure be worth it, for your magazine to take notice what is happening here. The “Rivervision” web page # is this:
.
Much more information is available there.

Please check it out.

By the way, one of our near-by local neihbors is a off/on contributor to your magazine. He is “Robert Michael Pyle”

From, Donna M. Kust, of Chinook, WA 98614

And who’s such a subservient and palm-greased friend of the nuclear industry? Could it be that darling of pie-eyed progressives, B. Obama?

Thanks for telling me about Environmentalists for Nuclear
Energy.  I joined up.

Question:  How much coal company stock does Rebecca
Solnit own?  Does Rebecca Solnit own a coal mine?  Is
Rebecca Solnit married to a coal company executive?

Let’s review the facts.  Rebecca Solnit has a degree in
English literature from San Francisco State University. 
Rebecca Solnit has written a lot of books and magazine
articles about a lot of subjects, none of them scientific. 
Rebecca Solnit is certified to know nothing
about physics and nuclear engineering.  Rebecca Solnit should go back to school and get a degree in either
physics or nuclear engineering before running her pen. 
Why is it that this lack of knowledge does not prevent
Rebecca Solnit from expressing her opinion?

Asteroid Miner has a degree in Physics from Carnegie-
Mellon University and more than enough graduate credits
for an advanced degree in engineering.  Asteroid Miner is
retired after working for the US government as a scientist
and engineer.  Asteroid Miner’s experience includes
research in nuclear weapons effects.  Asteroid Miner has
NO connection with the nuclear power industry.  Asteroid
Miner has never worked for the nuclear power industry.  It
is just that Asteroid Miner would rather not go extinct
because of global warming. 

“Fact” in Rebecca Solnit’s article:  Rebecca Solnit is
paranoid about nuclear waste and nuclear fuel reprocessing. 
The truth: Nuclear “waste” is valuable fuel if only people
like Rebecca Solnit would allow it to be used as fuel.  We
could refuel our reactors from the “waste” in that mountain
in Utah.

“Fact” in Rebecca Solnit’s article:  Rebecca Solnit thinks we
don’t have enough nuclear fuel sources. 
The truth:  If breeding is allowed, enough uranium and
thorium goes up the smokestack of an average coal fired
power plant to FULLY fuel 500 nuclear power plants of the
same capacity.  A 1 billion watt coal fired power plant
burns 4 million tons of coal each year.  If you multiply 4
million tons by 1 part per million, you get 4 tons of
uranium.  Most of that is U238.  About .7% is U235.  4
tons = 8000 pounds.  8000 pounds times .7% = 56 pounds
of U235.  An average 1 billion watt coal fired power plant
puts out 56 to 112 pounds of U235 every year.  That is
enough to keep one nuclear power plant of the same
capacity running for a year.  There are only 2 places the
uranium can go: Up the stack or into the cinders.  We Can
extract uranium and thorium from the smoke and cinders of
coal fired power plants. 

“Fact” in Rebecca Solnit’s article:  Rebecca Solnit thinks it
takes too long to build nuclear power plants. 
The truth:  Paranoid people like Rebecca Solnit cause a lot
of pointless delays and raise the price of electricity by their
protests.  If the safety level of nuclear power plants were
LOWERED to the same level as coal-fired power plants,
the resulting [nuclear] electricity would be very cheap
indeed and nuclear power would be very efficient.

The truth:  Besides carbon, coal also contains:
Aluminum Chromium Molybdenum
Antimony Cobalt Nickel
Arsenic Copper Selenium
Barium Fluorine Silver
Beryllium Iron Sulfur
Boron Lead Titanium
Cadmium Magnesium Uranium
Calcium Manganese Vanadium
Chlorine Mercury Zinc
Thorium

The truth:  We have only 200 years before we go extinct if
we keep on burning coal.  See:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=00037A5D-
A938-150E-A93883414B7F0000≻=I100322
from the October 2006 issue of Scientific American
Article:  “Impact from the Deep”
Compared to extinction, a few nuclear wars are minor
problems.

You could also talk about the economics of nuclear power.  Last year the NJ Dept of Environmental Protection asked that the owners build cooling towers at the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant in Ocean County, at a cost estimated to $600 million for the 600 MW reactor. 

That same money, invested in wind turbines would build a 300 to 600 MW wind farm. 

What is the true cost per watt to construct a nuclear power plant?

The cost for land based wind is $1.00 to $2.00 per watt. Offshore wind is about $3.00 per watt. The cost for photovoltaic solar is $6 to $8.

And wind and solar produce no greenhouse gases, no radioactive wastes, no mercury or other toxic wastes. There are no mines, mills, wells, etc.

And when you’re finished talking about economics you could talk about the national security implications of nuclear power.

Knowing the answer in advance makes it so much easier to write articles doesn’t it?

There are trade-offs with all energy-generating technology. As for wind farms, well not in my backyard thank you very much. They are noisy, an eyesore, use up lots of land and are a hazard to birds. Oh and what do you do when the wind doesn’t blow?

Ever consider the environmental effects of hydro power? Dams can destroy large areas of land.

And the previous respondent has addressed the nasty effects of coal-burning.

Ethanol? Well, it is a biofuel - but it eats up huge acres of valuable agricultural land. And the processing and transportation costs as well.

So, what is the answer? Probably all of the above (including nuclear dear reader), where appropriate.

Spare us from the fanatics.

Another problem with nuclear power is the proposed waste handling system of encasing it a zircon ceramic which was found to be lacking stability in a report in NATURE 2007 445, Vol 199.  The claim was made that such encasing would last several millenniums before any deterioration effects, but the authors found evidence of effects in 10 years.

hmm.. isnt the SUN a nuclear reaction? of a sort? How come we cannot capture the power of the Sun Rain and Wind in some cheap form, and stop burning up thwe bones of the earth? I’m Just Curious.

Why do we have to live in a way that uses things up?
Arent we given such riches on this planet? What is the untapped power of photosynthysis when plants can move stones? What is the untapped power of the daily tide?

Save us from *all* fanatics. Please. Reamain life-long questioners and stay beautiful and FREE of old assumptions, folks.

Amatul in Boston