Living in a World That’s Anything But Ideal
The German mathematician and rationalist philosopher Gottfried Leibniz speculated that although this world is clearly not perfect, that it may be the “best of all possible worlds.” Under this theory, God created the very best world He could; any other choice He could have made would have resulted in even more suffering than what we have here today.
Whether we buy into this or not, no one contends that this is an ideal world, which means that, as a consequence, we as a civilization need to make tough choices regarding things like our energy resources.
I have several concerns about those who are rabidly against nuclear energy, all centering around one point: they apparently haven’t looked dispassionately at the math and science. In particular:
- Despite occasional disasters, nuclear has historically been among the safest of all energy resources. And with today’s technology and better understanding of siting issues, the chances of catastrophe are reduced much further.
- Taking nuclear offline means dealing with higher emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases, not to mention toxic elements and compounds, as suggested in this piece about the closure of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Plant.
News flash: We don’t have an ideal world. Environmental decisions need to be made on the hard numbers, not on what we’d like to see in such a paradise.
Craig as the German Philosopher said.
We live in a Imperfect World – so there are trade offs to be made.
yes closing down Vermont Yankee causes some gas / and oil emission to go up .
Similar to what Germany has experienced with more coal being burned to back up the growing RE sector as they work their National Energy Plan.
They will make corrections over time as batteries and enhanced performance new wind along with more efficient CHP gas plants that do district heating etc. come On line. Transition, Takes some time to back off one source of energy and displace it with the better mix.
Craig , so NE has a choice to make allow for some expansion of the gas pipeline capacity into their area so that most of the oil can be turned off . And also ramp up more end use efficiency and deployment of Renewable Energy.
They also can face reality and pay to have Transmission Lines expanded so they can import surplus Canadian Ontario Hydro power which is low cost to boost. Other regions of NY and NE are doing that now to make up for closed coal plants.
These are all reasonable choices or options.
But to cling to aging nuclear plant that has a history of maintenance issues and rising costs is not a top ranking option. During regulatory hearings over 5 years ago , testimony was provided by critics to the hearing. The information showed where the radiation cooling water leaks under the plant are and proved the potential for public health issues. etc.
The cost to mitigate is enormous
BTW the source for the critical information were some Vermont Yankee employees who wanted to do the right thing and gave the inside information to the activists who presented it.
They presented better info than the utility experts who were defending the plant etc. in the public utility hearings.
So this had lots to do with the final decision of the Holding co utility to finally just retire the plant rather than spend millions or more ….on trying to upgrade this plant.
The lesson for boosters of the nuclear Genie as clean power that can address the GHG and emissions issue is that they and the industry must get is collective Act together to move forward and remain viable. Slogans will not Wish Upon the Star the problems away !
It will be tragic yet comic at the same time if the Westinghouse bankruptcy stops all work on the 4 plants in south. – around 75 % complete now. Southern Co said yesterday that their terms of the bankruptcy may demand payment from many contractors involved and these same contractors are owed money from Westinghouse. And they Toshiba owners may walk away … the bankruptcy option if used by Westinghouse could present several legal challenges to others including the SO. Co Georgia Power on getting the plants finished. so it gets real thick and the lawyers will make the money. So now nuclear creates more legal $$$ – and we once thought it was all about clean KWHRs. LOL LOL
Obama’s DOE gave these two nuclear plants approximate to $ 8 Billion in loan guarantees so the FEDs and you and I are on the hook for this now.
BTW Georgia Power announced they plan on adding 1,60 more megawatts of solar by 2021 to add to the 846 solar megawatts they now have running. they decided if the Georgia Peaches and vidallia Onions love the sun so much, well then so can electric users !!!1 No loan guarantees or decommissioning costs along the high cost of a nuclear plant. No fuel costs either.
if the Georgia crackers can figure things out those intellectuals up North ought to be able to get a clue on their Challenges.
So where is the responsibility in any of this ?? I ask you ! How can we trust companies that cant build plants right or operate them right with our collective energy future.
Much work to be done by nuclear sector to regain its cutting edge and reclaim public support. They have some new technology almost ready but do they have the other foundations ready to support a viable SMR program???
Till then the claim that anti nuclear folks are somehow missing the point is just another time worn Straw Man that will not light up ! Every sector has a track record and yes the production and safety for nuclear is better than most would claim but it is High Reward High Risk technology and when it does go South it takes everyone down with it. Go Ask the Japs.! Ask all the kids with thyroid cancers now?
Yes we do have a Host of Hobson Choice Challenges ahead of us. Hopefully the Best and the Brightest can chart the way ! But we must not blindly follow the Pied Pipers and their much touted Technical solutions like before.
What is the Trumper going to do to help this situation? he is the deal maker – can he make things work ???
We both doubt it , just having some Sardonic Humor !
“We live in the best of all possible worlds” was satirized very nicely in Lenard Bernstein’s operetta “Candid,” (based upon Voltaire by the same name.) It is a favorite not only for the music, but the composer, and the philosophy.
It seems as if everything can and often is taken to absurd proportions. “There is absolutely no choice but the nuclear option,” seems about as extreme as “We must stop all nuclear power immediately.”
I don’t favor nuclear power as it is presently conducted. Philosophically it favors a “secret” knowledge held by a few. It shuns full disclosure. It is against decentralized power. It favors central decisions by a few that are then imposed upon the many.
Like fossil fuels it is a concentrated power source that is not without hazards. We can limit the potential for failures but can’t eliminate them. Any promise to fix a disaster is empty in the worst case. Fukushima makes it clear we simply don’t have the technology and ultimately can’t afford the consequences.
However we have traveled this dangerous path and we can do better. French systems managed by a monopoly seemed to have achieved some limited success. I have sometimes speculated that all domestic nuclear energy systems should be run by the military. This would also place control within the organization that is likely best suited to handle any disasters. Gorbachev called in the military to clean up Chernobyl and there have been calls to bring in the military to take over the clean up disaster of the Fukushima accident. Perhaps I also get some perverse joy out of opposing two Republican favorites of the military and private enterprise.
Going “cold turkey” on nuclear power seems like it would bring with it compromises that no one likes to to discuss, a return to coal, more natural gas where available? Doing this would also restrict any advances in technology.
It seems as though the military will embrace nuclear power for some time to come they may be the proper venue for both operation and future technology.