With ‘clean coal’ and nuclear power likely to play a larger-than-expected role in climate change legislation, are we heading for an iceberg? Literally, no–they’re all melting. Figuratively, maybe…

Follow Mean Joe Green on Twitter at @GreenCartoons

Mean Joe Green Cartoon Archive

There is a controversial decision to be made in Maryland soon regarding a nuclear reactor that might be built there. Similar to reactors being built in Finland that British and Finnish regulators are finding problems with, this reactor would be built largely by a French nuclear technocratic elite who are operating in a questionable and risky way.

The project in Maryland is a 4.5 billion dollar deal that is trying to skirt public service regulation. Thanks in part to a regional coalition, the Chesapeake Safe Energy Coalition (CSEC), and their ability to get 650 petition signatures sent to the Public Service Commission (PSC), the nuclear business elite are running into responsible and practical decision-making that will give more public accountability.

An in-depth report of the history of nuclear technology in France that leads into the situation today was completed by international nuclear expert and consultant Mycle Schneider in May of this year. There are many issues put forth in this paper that are discussed in great detail and with appropriate connection to various global issues (i.e. issues regarding political conflict and the environment). Six key points from the report are introduced below:

Read more of this story »

With the historic passage of climate legislation through the House of Representatives, many concerns have trickled forth. Does the climate legislation do enough? Will it even work? Does it have the right aim? With the issuance of similar concerns have come proposed solutions and substitutions. The republicans have proposed that 100 nuclear power plants be built by 2030 in place of the proposed cap-and-trade climate bill. I’ve recently written two articles on the Republican “solution” to both the climate and economic crises. And today I’m writing more.

Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) announced his own personal blueprint for the nation’s recovery. He began by re-stating the Senate Republicans’ plan that would replace the cap-and-trade legislation passed by the House, which includes building 100 nuclear power plants within 20 years, the encouragement of electric cars for conservation, offshore exploration for natural gas and oil and doubling energy research and development to make renewable energy cost-competitive.

Read more of this story »

A few weeks ago Senator Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) called for a new energy solution. A solution that came in the form of 100 new nuclear power plants. That vision has not left the republicans’ eyes. And on Tuesday, Senator Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) added his two cents.

During a hearing of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Crapo stated that “any successful plan to reduce carbon emissions must also involve nuclear power…Nuclear power is the best and quickest way to increase our clean energy options.” And mentioned that it should be included in any legislation, including the democrat-backed cap and trade legislation currently on the table.

Crapo said the Idahoans are skeptical of the cap and trade deal due to the possibility of increased energy costs. “A better option may be to ramp up the use of clean, nuclear technology, and existing energy sources so that we may transition to new sources without the damage to our economy we would see under a cap and trade scheme,” he added.

He urged the exploration and advancement on the United States’ nuclear energy infrastructure, calling nuclear power “the best solution on climate change.”

This post contains additional media. Click here to view the full post.

Photo Credit: huntz via flickr under Creative Commons License

And now the blueprint:

“Nuclear power is the obvious first step to a policy of clean and low-cost energy. One hundred new plants in 20 years would double U.S. nuclear production, making it about forty percent of all electricity production. Add 10% for sun and wind and other renewables, another 10% for hydroelectric, maybe 5% for natural gas—and we begin to have a cheap as well as clean energy policy.”

The second step is to transition into an electric vehicle nation, where half of the cars are electric. According to Brookings Institution scholars, this could be done without building more power plants because of the vast amounts of energy that goes unused at nights. That power, which is already produced, would be used as vehicles charged overnight.

The third step? “Explore offshore for natural gas (it’s low carbon) and oil (using less, but using our own).”

And finally, put more money toward research - doubling funding. We need to work to create answers to meet energy challenges, which include: improving batteries for plug-in vehicles, making solar power cost competitive with fossil fuels, making carbon capture a reality for coal-burning plants, safely recycling used nuclear fuel, making advanced biofuels (crops we don’t eat) cost-competitive with gasoline, making more buildings green buildings and providing energy from fusion.

Here lies his blueprint. He exposed it to proponents and opponents alike. And he closed by stating that “our policy of cheap and clean energy based upon nuclear power, electric cars, off-shore exploration and doubling energy R&D will help family budgets and create jobs. It will also prove to be the fastest way to increase American energy independence, clean the air and reduce global warming.”

He welcomes comments at www.alexander.senate.gov.

For a full text of his speech, click here.

Photo Credit: www.alexander.senate.gov

“We all remember this time last year,” said Senator Roger Wicker, R-Miss., at a hearing on Capitol Hill on Monday. “We were in the midst of an energy crisis, paying $4 for a gallon of gasoline, and Americans were seeing their utility bills skyrocketing.” Since then, he went on to say, the energy problems haven’t disappeared and no changes in policy have been made. He warned that, though the prices have gone down, if we do not make any changes, we will fall into the same hole in which we found ourselves last summer.

His solution? Nuclear. Stating that “the cornerstone of any real solution to the American energy problem needs to involve offshore resources and nuclear power…which generates electricity without producing greenhouse gas emissions and has a minimal impact on the environment.”  The first step to escaping America’s current energy crisis according to Wicker is to build more nuclear power plants.

Read more of this story »

It seems unlikely that an agreement on the terms of the next climate treaty could be reached at the December-scheduled Copenhagen talks. The United States, not a member of the Kyoto Protocol and one of the major players in the international negotiations tussle over the climate treaty, has not yet reached a consensus over how to reduce carbon emissions and a bill successfully passing through the Senate in 2009 seems quite difficult.

The major issues that US lawmakers need to look into are, first, how to make the transition from carbon-intensive fossil fuels to clean renewable energy sources and, second, how to finance this transition without burdening the people with any significant monetary load.

The proposed carbon trading scheme has attracted criticism from the environmentalists since it allows the government to distribute emission permits to the industries free of cost. A bill proposing a nationwide carbon tax was also introduced in the US Congress but experts fear that, if implemented, the bill would put a financial burden of more than $1000 per year on the US households.

Read more of this story »

In southeast Utah rests a peaceful town located on the banks of a peaceful river. Here the Green River flows between two canyons, Gray and Labyrinth, allowing for farming and ranching in an arid desert. Driving through Green River, Utah doesn’t take but a few moments, including a stop to purchase some mouth-watering melons, for which Green River is famous. But Green River now has a new claim to fame.

Transition Power Development LLC (TPD) has proposed construction of a 2 unit nuclear power plant known as the Blue Castle Project situated just outside of the peaceful town. In order to maintain the 2 unit nuclear power plant, massive amounts of water would be required. The Kane County Water Conservancy District (KCWCD) has filed a water-rights application in order to facilitate the project. The application requests 29,600 acre-feet of water, which would be diverted from the Green River, a part of the Colorado River drainage.

Read more of this story »

Perhaps the uranium industry’s fear of peak uranium is unfounded. Intellectual Ventures is preparing to spin off a company called TerraPower to develop nuclear reactors that run primarily on depleted uranium. While most nuclear reactors use enriched uranium, the depleted variety has many advantages— most importantly, a smaller amount of uranium is required to create the same amount of power.

Read more of this story »

Iran is on its way to having nuclear energy, but the United Arab Emirates may get there first. Yesterday, the UAE embassy in Washington announced that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is scheduled to sign a nuclear cooperation pact with the country.  The UAE agreed to numerous conditions for Rice’s approval, including inspections from the International Atomic Energy Agency and a ban on building uranium enrichment plants.

Read more of this story »

The safety of nuclear plants is often debated, but we rarely hear about another potential issue for nuclear energy: peak uranium. That’s the point in time when when the maximum global uranium production is reached and begins to enter a permanent decline. And while we’ve known for some time that high-quality uranium supplies have been declining for the past 50 years, nuclear operators are finally getting nervous.

Read more of this story »

I remember seeing the movie Chain Reaction back in 1996 and praying that nuclear fusion would become a reality in my lifetime. And according to researchers at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (LLNL) in California, it just might. At the facility’s National Ignition Facility (NIF), researchers are gearing up to test the potentially unlimited power source.

Read more of this story »

That is, if the US Congress helps him by trashing George Bush’s deal with India before he can sign it into law. And the urgency means it is a critical time for both Washington and New Delhi. This might be easy if there’s no deal before the November presidential elections.

Here are the stakes: India seeks out partners to co-develop its nuclear energy potential, worth about US$ 80 billion. By 2032 the government plans to quadruple total generating capacity, to 700 gigawatts, with nuclear accounting for 63,000 megawatts.

Read more of this story »

Just what you want to hear about a mixed oxide fuel fabrication facility designed to handle weapons-grade plutonium, huh? You can read the whole account here (PDF).

Image credit: U.S. Department of Energy via Wikimedia Commons.

And now the blueprint:

“Nuclear power is the obvious first step to a policy of clean and low-cost energy. One hundred new plants in 20 years would double U.S. nuclear production, making it about forty percent of all electricity production. Add 10% for sun and wind and other renewables, another 10% for hydroelectric, maybe 5% for natural gas—and we begin to have a cheap as well as clean energy policy.”

The second step is to transition into an electric vehicle nation, where half of the cars are electric. According to Brookings Institution scholars, this could be done without building more power plants because of the vast amounts of energy that goes unused at nights. That power, which is already produced, would be used as vehicles charged overnight.

The third step? “Explore offshore for natural gas (it’s low carbon) and oil (using less, but using our own).”

And finally, put more money toward research - doubling funding. We need to work to create answers to meet energy challenges, which include: improving batteries for plug-in vehicles, making solar power cost competitive with fossil fuels, making carbon capture a reality for coal-burning plants, safely recycling used nuclear fuel, making advanced biofuels (crops we don’t eat) cost-competitive with gasoline, making more buildings green buildings and providing energy from fusion.

Here lies his blueprint. He exposed it to proponents and opponents alike. And he closed by stating that “our policy of cheap and clean energy based upon nuclear power, electric cars, off-shore exploration and doubling energy R&D will help family budgets and create jobs. It will also prove to be the fastest way to increase American energy independence, clean the air and reduce global warming.”

He welcomes comments at www.alexander.senate.gov.

For a full text of his speech, click here.

Photo Credit: www.alexander.senate.gov

It was only yesterday that the Congress led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) - the ruling party in India - was negotiating the Nuclear Deal with the United States, in an attempt to boost the country’s Nuclear Power sector. And now that the deal is set and ready to be signed, the Government is itself struggling to stay in power. Energy and ‘Power’ have indeed been closely associated in the recent past and politics is known to be governed by the energy sector. But when the world’s largest democracy faces a political crisis over an energy policy, we can safely conclude that in the climate constrained world of today, the only way to stay in power is to get the energy policy right!

Read more of this story »

T. Boone Pickens helps bring wind energy to the center of the energy discussion and the center of the political aisle.

Misguided Probing
I don’t think it made the 3 minute clip CBS aired, but in the full 12 minute interview Katie Couric instantly goes after T. Boone Pickens about his financial aspirations of starting a wind farm. Now I’m no big T. Boone Pickens fan, but Katie, people start companies to make money (and tycoons usually start businesses to make billions). As much as you can fault the man for funding the swiftboat attack ads against John Kerry, or fault him for his influence on the Republican Party, you can’t fault the man for starting a business and wanting to make money.

I think Katie is trying to get T. Boone to say what everyone already knows (so why even waste time probing for a confession?) which is, T. Boone Pickens doesn’t care about the environment or the economic revival of rural economies as the well laid out spinning on his Pickens Plan website would like you to believe.

T. Boone Pickens cares about money–and he’s good at making it.

So why then, poke and prod a man who will put his tycoon-ish master mind to work on an energy source that will benefit the nation environmentally and economically?
Katie should’ve poked and prodded T. Boone for what was curiously left out of the Pickens Plan.

Read more of this story »

Just another reason why uranium isn’t the way to go, it costs the taxpayer way too much money for what he receives.

Take the former Fernald Feed Materials Production Center at Fernald, Ohio, that’s about 20 miles northwest of Cincinnati.  The former uranium processing site opened in complete secrecy during the Cold War in 1951.  The plant fabricated uranium fuel cores for the U.S. nuclear weapons production complex until 1989, when it shut the doors.

Releases from the plant exposed residents of the small community of Fernald to radon, soluble and insoluble forms of uranium and various chemicals, both in groundwater and from blowing dust.  The health consequences to residents and former workers are still being evaluated.

Read more of this story »

With escalating oil and gas costs and growing French electricity imports, Italy is changing is stance on nuclear power. The re-elected Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi promised on his campaign to recommit the country to nuclear power and an heated debate is now popping up from north to south.

The general impression is there is still strong local opposition for three main reasons: high construction costs, projected build times of one to two decades and no identifiable Italian community willing to see a nuclear reactor built in their neighborhood. Italy has also failed to resolve the issue of what to do with nuclear waste. A proposed dump in Basilicata region was shelved in 2003 after thousands of demonstrators staged road blocks, marches and hunger strikes.

Read more of this story »

Nothing like solving one problem while creating another. I can understand that he may hate the sun for what it does to his pasty white skin. And that he may hate the wind for messing up his well placed comb-over–but if he could just look past all that and see that both the sun and the wind could provide our country free, clean energy he’d have many more fans in the REAL world.

Could it be the one time cost for a wind turbine and/or solar panels that’s keeping the energy industry, John, and many of his right-wing good-old-boys from falling in love with the right alternative? Without the option for a wide base of customers to gouge repeatedly (ie. fuel costs) they all may be thinking–what’s the point?

Read more of this story »

For all the minorities in this country who have raised pluperfect hell about their past or current situations, the American Indian has been the quietist, and I wonder why.

Before you write me nasty emails, I’m not minimizing the concerns of minorities in this country: they have their issues and the right to use their voices, and that’s good.

But think for a moment about the original settlers of this land, the American Indian.

They did just fine for centuries, sustaining their cultures with the fruits of the land, picking fights and having wars, just like we all do.

Then, came the white man (no emails please, because that’s what happened), who invaded the natives’ birthright, confiscated their tribal lands, transferred them to reservations and literally forgot about them. Many of those Native Americans to this very day are without electricity and running water, in some cases, living in dirt poor conditions, and they languish without raising their voices.

How incredibly sad.

Read more of this story »

Britain may not have much choice in this matter as its government seems determined to take the nuclear route in an effort to bring Co2 emissions in line with its reduction pledges and mitigate its dwindling North Sea oil and gas supplies.

Announcing plans to enter into a technology partnership with France, the UK government proposes replacing its 24 aging reactors - which currently provide 20% of the nation’s electricity - with a new set of nuclear power plants which will double Britain’s nuclear power generating capacity. In doing so, Britain hopes to become a “world leader in nuclear technology”, according to Energy Secretary John Hutton.

Read more of this story »