Archive for the ‘No nukes’ Category

Nuclear power completely uncompetitive on costs

April 22, 2013

Jerry Taylor: For Now, Nuclear Can’t Compete. Jerry Taylor, WSJ, 17 April 13  Nuclear power simply cannot compete with gas-fired power. And absent some major technological breakthrough, it’s unlikely to do so in the future.

nuclear-costs3

This is not a matter of opinion. This is a matter of economic fact. Even with all of the production tax credits, loan guarantees and a battery of other direct and indirect subsidies, nuclear power remains the most expensive source of conventional electricity on the grid once capital costs are plugged into the equation. That’s why no one has ordered a new nuclear power plant in decades. That’s why nuclear power plants are being retired today in the face of cheap natural gas for as far as the eye can see.

Nuclear proponents like to dodge the cost estimates and assert that it is environmental opposition preventing new plant orders. But there’s zero evidence for this proposition. The regulations governing new plant licensing and construction were overhauled in the 1990s at the behest of industry, and the Nuclear Energy Institute—the trade association for the industry—today offers no such complaints about federal regulation. We’ll only know about environmental opposition once new plants are able to clear the economic hurdle. And so far, they haven’t.
Nor does one find more favorable economics abroad. Construction costs in France—the most “nuclear friendly” free market economy in the world—are just as high as they are here. The same holds true in Japan prior to the Fukushima Daiichi disaster.
Were things to change and nuclear power became economically competitive, I would have no complaints. But market actors—not political agents—should decide what gets built in a free-market economy.
Jerry Taylor is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute in Washington, D.C. He has written studies on energy taxes, the oil market, electricity regulation, energy efficiency, renewable energy, sustainable development and trade and the environment.

Fourth Radioactive Water Leak Found at Disaster-Plagued Fukushima Plant

April 12, 2013

Published on Thursday, April 11, 2013 by Common Dreams

Newest leak follows TEPCO admission that the “underground tanks are not reliable”

- Andrea Germanos, staff writer

fourth leak has been detected at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclearpower plant, its operator TEPCO announced Thursday, and is the latest in a string of failures at the disaster-stricken facility still struggling with the aftermath of the meltdowns following the 2011 massive earthquake and tsunami.

Tokyo Electric Power Co’s (TEPCO) President Naomi Hirose (4th L) and the company officials at the Fukushima Daiichi plant on April 10, 2013. (Photo: Tokyo Electric Power Co. Handout)The announcement of the new leak comes just two days after TEPCO said the third of seven underground radioactive water pools were leaking, and also follows two failures of the plant’scooling system in a month.

“This time about 22 liters of radioactive water has leaked from a junction of the piping. The liquid has seeped into the soil,” Kyodonews reports TEPCO as saying.

On Wednesday, Nuclear Regulation Authority Chairman Shunichi Tanakaacknowledged that “Fukushima No. 1 is still in an extremely unstable condition. There is no mistake about that.” Foreshadowing the new leak announcement, Tanaka added, “We cannot rule out the possibility that similar problems might occur again.”

And Masayuki Ono, TEPCO general manager, had told a news conference, “We admit that the underground tanks are not reliable,” and said “our faith in the underwater tanks is being lost.”

On the integrity of the existing storage tanks, the New York Timesreported:

… as outside experts have discovered with horror, the company had lined the pits for the underground pools with only two layers of plastic each 1.5 millimeters thick, and a third, clay-based layer just 6.5 millimeters thick. And because the pools require many sheets hemmed together, leaks could be springing at the seams, Tepco has said.

On Wednesday, TEPCO President Naomi Hirose told a news conference that the underwater storage tanks would no longer be used, and that TEPCO would be moving 7,100 tons of the radioactive water to surface storage tanks, and would build 38 new steel tanks for the rest of the radioactive water, The Asahi Shimbun reported.

The decommissioning of the Fukushima plant is expected to take at least four decades.

Nearly 160,000 people fled the area following the nuclear disaster, with some areas now looking like ghost towns. Tens of thousands are stilldisplaced, and the human health and ecological effects remain to fully unfold.

The State of Nuclear Power in US: Bad and Worse

April 12, 2013

Published on Thursday, April 11, 2013 by Common Dreams

New report says NRC is ill-prepared for massive meltdown, which former NRC chair says is likely

- Lauren McCauley, staff writer

The Byron Generating Station in Byron, IL. (Photo: Michael Kappel/ Flickr)As operators at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant announce yet another radiation leak, US officials turn to the state of domestic nuclear plants only to find dangerous and widespread safety issues and “antiquated” emergency planning, leaving the US population open to “potentially devastating human consequences.”

report by the Government Accountability Office released Wednesday found that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is not adequately prepared for a real nuclear emergency and that they fail to account for mass “shadow” evacuations from beyond the NRC’s accounted for 10 mile buffer zone, as demonstrated by the recent Fukushima and Chernobyl nuclear disasters.

After reviewing the report, nuclear watchdog agency the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, compounded the critical findings by adding that another flaw, overlooked by the GAO, is the NRC’s failure to account for the impact of long-term exposure effects on American citizens.

“In a real radiation release, the American people will expect the government to act to protect them against exposures that could cause damaging health effects,” said Michael Mariotte, executive director of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service. “This is especially important since the NRC’s current antiquated rules are based on exposure effects to an average adult man—yet women and children are far more susceptible to radiation than men.”

Current plans, he adds, are only designed to protect against the immediate health effects of high-level radiation exposure and fail to “prevent large-scale exposure to radiation levels that would cause chronic illness, including cancer.”

A large scale nuclear failure in the US may not be so far off. According to the former chairman of the NRC, Gregory B. Jaczko, all of the 104 nuclear power reactors currently in operation in the US “have a safety problem that cannot be fixed and they should be replaced with newertechnology,” reports the New York Times. Jaczko made the statement while attending a session Monday about the Fukushima meltdown during the Carnegie International Nuclear Policy Conference.

Jaczko said he came to this conclusion after “watching as the industry and the regulators and the whole nuclear safety community continues to try to figure out how to address these very, very difficult problems.” He added, “Continuing to put Band-Aid on Band-Aid is not going to fix the problem.”

The GAO report follows the announcement last week of new EPA-backed radiation “clean-up” standards which essentially raise the permissible number of people expected to develop cancer from long-term radiation exposure.

“These standards would codify cancer and are completely at odds with civilized society,” said Mariotte.

Mary Lampert, director of the Massachusetts-based Pilgrim Watch, called the report ”criminal.” The “only humane and sane approach,” she said, would be for the report authors “to recommend measures to reduce the risk of nuclear disasters in light of the potentially real and potentially devastating economic and human consequences; and then to recommend policies and a framework to deal with short and long-term off-site consequences.”

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

April 11, 2013

吉永小百合さんが英国の大学で原爆詩を朗読

知人友人の皆さんへ
         杉浦公昭
平和こそ我が命

吉永小百合さんが英国の大学で原爆詩を朗読

2013年04月10日

 木村康一さんは今から約三時間前に以下の動画をFacebookにアップしました。皆さん是非見て下さい。 イギリスで吉永小百合さんが原爆詩の朗読会坂本龍一さんがピアノ伴奏 オックスフォード大学 以下のYoutubeのアップロード日2011/10/29http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=lEalWrdso8w吉永さんの朗読は、必ずこの詩から始まる

Yoshinaga’s reading starts with

the Preface by Sankichi Tohge:

『序』    峠三吉
ちちをかえせ ははをかえせ
としよりをかえせ
こどもをかえせ

Give me back my father, my mother

Give me back the old

Give me back the young

わたしをかえせ わたしにつながる
にんげんをかえせ

Give me back me, human beings

connected with me

にんげんの にんげんのよのあるかぎり
くずれぬへいわを
へいわをかえせ

Give me back peace,

Give me back the peace

Not collapsing so long as the human world is

こうゆう詩があるということと、日本が原爆を受けたことを日本の若い子さえも知らない訳なんですよね。だから学生さん達に少しでも卒業後に何かの形で心に残ってもらえたらどんなに嬉しいかと思いまする。

『慟哭』    大平数子
逝ったひとはかえってこれないから
逝ったひとは叫ぶことが出来ないから
逝ったひとはなげくすべがないから

Because the passed one never come back

Because the passed one never come back

Because the passed one can never mourn

しょうじ(昇二) よう
やすし(泰) よう
しょうじ よう
やすし よう

Ah Shoji!

Ah Yasushi!

Shoji!

Yasushi!

http://bit.ly/u7N3HT (エピソード)

つばめさん つばめさん つばめさん

Oh Swallow, Oh Swallow, Oh Swallow!

あなたがいた南の国に
もしや私のこどもが帰るのを
わすれて遊んでいやしないでしょうか
あの子は もの覚えのいい子だから
きっと私を思い出してくれるでしょうけれども

In the Sourthern country where you were

Is my child playing, forgetting

To come back

That child was good at memory

Surely will he remember me…

こどもたち あなたは知っているでしょう
正義ということを

Children! You know

Justice – that

正義とは 剣をぬくことではないことを
正義とは 愛だということを

Justice is not unsheathing a sword

Justice is love
今年、東日本大震災によって引き起こされた原発事故。今回の朗読会にふたりは特別な思いを抱いていました。
<坂本龍一のメッセージ>

The nuclear disaster caused by the Great East Japan Earthquake.

Both of them embraced the special thought about the reading event

The essage of the pianist, Ryuichi Sakamoto
福島で起きた最悪の事故は、原子力を平和的に使うという
幻想から私たちを目覚めさせました
武器であろうと電力であろうと
核と人類は共存できないと世界に証明することが
次に必要なことなのです

The severest disaster happened in Fukushima made us

awakened to the delusion of using the atomic power for peace.

The next necessity is to prove the world that nukes and humans

can not coexist, either weapons or electric power.

吉永さんは震災の被害地を描いた詩を朗読することにしました。
<和合亮一の詩>
見えない姿の 子どもたちが 悲しい心の 子どもたちが
この土手に来て 鯉のぼりを 見あげている
津波が 津波が 来たんだね
つらかったね こわかったね 子どもたち

Sayuri Yoshinaga decided to read the poem of Ryoichi Wago

describing the disaster area of the eathquake disaster:

The children unseen of their figures

The children with suffering hearts

Coming here and looking up the flying carps

Tsunami, Tsunami came…

Hard was it, Awful was it, children

 評価の高いコメントkuresuto100 1 年前

峠三吉さんのこの詩何度も読み返しました。「・・にんげんをかえせ・・・へいわをかえせ・・」崩れぬ平和をまもるのは戦争をさせない不断の努力です。吉永さんは女優として稀有な存在ですが、このような地道で貴い仕事も続けておられます。私も戦争知らない戦後生まれですが、戦争を体験した人々の悲惨な事実と体験を次代に語り継ぐべき責任のある世代の一人として、こうした詩を広めることも含め戦争体験を語る会などを通して子どもたちへ伝えていきたいと­思います。

Comment valued: kuresuto100 one year ago
I read repeatedly Toge Sankichi’s poem. “…Give me back humans…Give me back peace…” Protecting unbreakable peace is ceaseless effort. Ms. Yoshinaga is a rare being as an actress, but also continues steadfast and valuable work. Even though I was born after the war not knowing the war, I want to transmit this through such meetings as those where we share the experience of the war, including the spread of such poems as this, as a person of the generation responsible to transmit the miserable facts and experiences of the people who experienced the war.
YouTube - Videos from this email

Share this:

All U.S. nuclear reactors are too dangerous, says former nuke-safety chief

April 10, 2013

By John Upton

nuclear plant
Thomas Anderson
Beware.

Right on the heels of troubling news from Japan’s Fukushima nuclear plant, here comes troubling news about nuke plants in the U.S.

From The New York Times:

All 104 nuclear powerreactors now in operation in the United States have a safety problem that cannot be fixed and they should be replaced with newer technology, the former chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said on Monday. Shutting them all down at once is not practical, he said, but he supports phasing them out rather than trying to extend their lives.

The position of the former chairman, Gregory B. Jaczko, is not unusual in that various anti-nuclear groups take the same stance. But it is highly unusual for a former head of the nuclear commission to so bluntly criticize an industry whose safety he was previously in charge of ensuring.

Asked why he did not make these points when he was chairman, Dr. Jaczko said in an interview after his remarks, “I didn’t really come to it until recently.”

“I was just thinking about the issues more, and watching as the industry and the regulators and the whole nuclear safety community continues to try to figure out how to address these very, very difficult problems,” which were made more evident by the 2011 Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan, he said. “Continuing to put Band-Aid on Band-Aid is not going to fix the problem.”

The nuclear power industry, you won’t be surprised to hear, disagrees with Jaczko’s assessment.

John Upton is a science aficionado and green news junkie who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

The Declaration of Zeronomics of Nuclear Plants

March 31, 2013

The following is the whole text of ”the Declaration of Zeronomics of Nuclear Plants.

You are welcome to quote or post, but never fail to note the source.

The Declaration of Zeronomics of Nuclear Plants

Year 2012

Japan, based on its reflection on the unprecedented accident of the Fukushima No. 1

nuclear plant, showed the pathway to Zero Nuclear Plants.

It was the expressed wishes of the overwhelming majority of citizens for no nuclear

plants that moved the politics.

That pathway is wavering under the shadow of ”Abenomics,” the economic policy

after the political power shift.

The voices of the people of Fukushima, whose inhabited land was deprived, living

their daily lives filled with the unbearable anxieties, and of many who aspire for

no nuclear plants. Is it good for us to recede backward to the dependence on nuclear

plants?

Many countries and companies in the world, after the disaster, have decided to retreat

from the nuclear power. Because it became clear that nuclear power does not pay off

and can never become economically plus, they are shifting from nuclear power and

fossil fuel to the natural energy, now becoming inexpensive due to their innovations in

drastic speed.

Originally and  first of all, even without the disaster, Japan should have taken up this

path as its task .

The energy policy paying  24 trillion Yen to import uranium and fossil fuel presupposing

mass production and mass consumption has become inappropriate for Japan with the

decreasing energy pacing with the decreasing population.

“The zeronomics of nuclear plants” reconsiders the old economic system depending on

nuclear power and imported energy, and is considering the shift to the locally distributive

network-economy system, making the natural energy in its core.

The keywords are “saving energy,” ”creating energy,” and ”IT networking.” It is to create

variegated related industries and employments by retaining the outgoing money for the

use of nuclear power and fossil fuel inside our own local areas. It is the proposal of

economic system for the rebirth of the whole Japanese economy as well as stopping global

warming, by envigorating the local economy.

The principal players are not countries or big businesses. Let us make each of us as a player

who inhavbits, lives, and aspires for no nuclear plants, and create our own economies!

We welcome your own declaration of the zeronomics of nuclear plants.

(Translated by O. Yoshida from http://zeronomics.wordpress.com/)

Noam Chomsky: If Nuclear War Doesn’t Get Us, Climate Change Will

March 28, 2013

 

resize:reset
Published on Thursday, March 28, 2013 by The Nation

The growing threats of nuclear war and environmental catastrophe make it hard to bet on the survival of our species.

 

© 2013 The Nation

Dangerous Crossroads: The Threat of a Pre-emptive Nuclear War directed against Iran | Global Research

March 27, 2013
March 27, 2013

 

By John Reed

This important article describes how the definition of a nuclear weapon has been changed in an Orwellian manner so that such bombs as bunker busters that contain nuclear yields up to a third of that dropped on Hiroshima are now not considered nuclear, or are considered tactical humanitarian nukes because they go off underground and supposedly limit human casualties.

 

Submitters Bio:

I am a retired criminal defense attorney who has also held many different positions from carpenter, teacher, short order cook, land-man, and corporate attorney.

I am also a husband and father, both roles, I suspect, do more to change a person than one’s choice of profession.
I am a passionate reader, particularly of non-fiction, and attempt to keep informed on developments in the major disciplines, such as history, physics, political economy, economics, theology, linguistics, sociology, etc., through reading books, rather than the INTERNET, although the net certainly has its place. I believe the decline in reading books in the last decades is responsible for the lack of critical thinking skills reflected in the American electorate, both left and right, but that this decline was planned after the near revolution of the 1960′s and early 1970′s, and obtained by changes in the curriculum at the various Colleges of Education around the country to emphasize the “self-esteem” movement and the “tolerance” ideology. The latter misused the word “tolerance” to mean that all ideas, cultures, religions, ideologies, etc., are equally valid and true, rather than equally to be respected. The difference led students to believe their feelings, as opposed to empirical facts, made their opinions true.

Guns, Nukes, Dollars, and the One Big Family Frame

March 22, 2013

March 20, 2013

Guns, Nukes, Dollars, and the One Big Family Frame

by Susan C. Strong,  for The Metaphor Project

Starting in 2005 and then again in 2008 and 2011, I wrote some web essays about the “one big family” frame in American politics.(1) These days it seems that the idea of our being one big family working together to create a better future is stone dead. Yet the enduring power of this part of our national narrative is still alive under the surface of things.   In fact, right now it has a lot of new relevance. It’s there in today’s popularly supported imperative to reduce gun violence in our nation. It’s present in the call to replace the costly, suicidal sequester cuts with something better. So an obvious alternative in tune with the times would be cuts that started to take new tools for nuclear murder/suicide off the table too.

Unexpected progress on the gun violence issue, plus the drubbing the G.O.P. took in the 2012 election, have actually opened up a new chapter in our American story. One of the reasons the Republicans lost the presidency was they didn’t pay enough attention to the “one big family” frame; now suddenly they are talking immigration reform and passing the Violence Against Women Act. Young members of their party are also urging them to drop the social conservatism of being against gay marriage or other longtime “social control” hobby horses they’ve ridden for years.

In fact, there is nothing more urgent than using the current belt-tightening, ideology-changing moment to focus on the nuclear issue. We’re worried about guns? Well, the biggest, most dangerous, and most fiscally wasteful guns of all, are the ones cocked and ready to blow up our planet–nukes deployed and on alert. We still have 1500 nuclear strategic weapons deployed at the ready, with another 5000 operational and 5000 more available on the shelf. The ones on alert are ready to blow by miscalculation or even accident, just like a loaded gun in somebody’s home. Only this time it’s our human planetary home at risk and all the humans on it. Recent research has shown that if only 50 bombs were exploded in an exchange between India and Pakistan, a global nuclear winter would ensue, destroying Earth’s civil society, the ecosphere on which it depends, and thus most humans.(2) Then there’s the Obama administration’s misguided plan to launch a whole new round of nuclear weapons development and deployment, some in the form of “modernized”   truck-based mobile nuclear weapons, to the tune of $600 billion.(3) Most important for the current debate, all proposed spending for these new nukes is being excluded from the sequester cuts. (4)

Along with being immoral, hypocritical, and likely to start a new nuclear weapons arms race worldwide, and given that we want everyone else to stop their nuke development, the U.S. plan is also fiscally stupid. Nuclear weapons are the unusable weapon; no responsible military man or woman worth their salt wants to use them. (5) Using them to threaten others is not credible in the hands of nations known to be somewhat rational, even though we did it once. In that case, it was two bombs, used to demonstrate what we could do. Nobody could fire back. The world has reviled that use of nuclear bombs ever since.

Now, we and others in the nuclear club literally have many thousands deployed and ready to fire, plus thousands more available.   This is crazy and expensive. Just as the G.O.P. needs to outgrow “social control” government, we as a nation need to outgrow throwing money at mountains of unusable weapons, or new doomsday weapons only a suicidal fool would use.   Moreover, nukes are just so “twentieth century,” as the saying goes. Although we may not like it much either, today’s modern “war” modality is via cyberspace or other much more sophisticated and eminently all too usable weapons. Let’s all grow up together about nukes now, when the budget pressure is hot and heavy. This is a once in a century chance to start making the earth and everyone on it much safer. That’s even bigger than the one big American family frame. It’s the one big human family frame.

Susan C. Strong, Ph.D., is the Founder and Executive Director of The Metaphor Project, http://www.metaphorproject.org=”">, and author of our new book, Move Our Message: How To GetAmerica’s Ear.   The Metaphor Project has been helping progressives mainstream their messages since 1997.
——————————————————————————–

1. The first piece I wrote about the “One Big Family Frame” was published on Common Dreams in 2005. I have revisited this frame several times in the last six years, in 2008 and again in 2011. To find more recent examples, search The Metaphor Project’s “Examples” archive at http://www.metaphorproject.org . Here’s a short refresher drawn from these essays about what the One Big Family frame has included throughout American history:

“It’s an historic American National Family metaphor, one that is larger than the   “strict father” or “nurturing parent” frames. The American National Family frame says our country is like any real extended family–fractious but in the end functional. There are people in it who aren’t just like you, but they are still family, and we still have to try to solve our problems together, despite our differences.

The story of this extended American family frame also implies a specific, historical American way of communal problem solving: nationally the operative descriptive words are ‘pragmatic,’ ‘solution-oriented,’ ‘common sense,’ ‘practical,’ ‘pulling together,’ and ‘teamwork.’ Many of these terms also apply at the local level too, along with ‘community building’ and ‘finding common ground.’

The most important thing about this ‘one big family’ frame is the way it pictures people focusing on real problem solving together. It’s about looking at what really works and what doesn’t, and emphasizing agreement, not disagreement. It also means having a shared goal everyone is working toward, even if their reasons for wanting the same result differ. It suggests working out a ‘rough consensus,’ and yes, compromising here and there if the potential results are worth it. It includes tolerating each other’s differences as part of the traditional American respect for variety, individuality, and difference of views.

A vital part of this frame is also the way it acknowledges that we all hold, at least in principle, the same set of basic American Public Moral Values– fairness, honesty, equal opportunity, democracy, freedom, and compassion–drawn from both religious and secular ethics.”

2. Figures and research findings included here were cited by Daniel Ellsberg, in a talk he delivered at “Half Life,” an event celebrating the work of the Western States Legal Foundation, on 2.10.13, inOakland, CA.

3. The New York Times op-ed, “The Nuclear Agenda,” February 24 th , 2013, and Tri-Valley CARES Citizen’s Watch report, “Return of Mobile Nukes?” p.3, January/February issue 2013.

4. Ploughshares Blog, 3.08.2013: http://ploughshares.org/blog/2013-03-08/earlywarning/why-are-nuclear ,

5. I’m aware of the idea that nukes are seen as useful to nuclear newcomers. This argument was described in a review entitled “Rethinking the Unthinkable,” by Bill Keller, in the January 13, 2013 New York Times Book Review, p. 12. He was citing The Second Nuclear Age, by Paul Bracken, who makes the case that nukes help newcomers to the nuclear club “bluff, intimidate, rally the populace, throw opponents off balance,” and blackmail other countries. They also act as a poison pill, preventing others from attacking them.   But even for those purposes, no one needs 1500, 5000, or even 50, and a big powerful country like ours doesn’t need new generations of nukes at all. Monkey see, monkey do!

Submitters Website: http://www.metaphorproject.org

Submitters Bio:

Susan C. Strong, Ph.D., is the founder and executive director of the Metaphor Project. She is also the author of our new book, MOVE OUR MESSAGE: HOW TO GET AMERICA’S EAR, available on our website. The mission of the Metaphor Project is helping Democrats, liberals and progressives learn how to mainstream their messages by framing them as part of the best American story.

_______________________________

Comment: One big family frame is the global family inclusive of all livings and (so called) non-living beings (which are all life sources).

Wind power is poised to kick nuclear’s ass

March 14, 2013

By John Upton

Blowing away the competition in California
Shutterstock / Tim Messick
Blowing away the competition in California.

In 2012, wind energy became the fastest-growing source of new electricity generation in the U.S., providing 42 percent of new generation capacity, according to the American Wind Energy Association.

Wind power is becoming so cheap and so commonplace that it appears poised to help blow up the country’s nuclear power sector, according to a recent Bloomberg article (which you really should read in full). Other highlights from the piece:

  • $25 billion was spent on wind energy in the U.S. in 2012.
  • The $25 billion outlay increased nationwide wind generating capacity by 13,124 megawatts – up 28 percent from 2011.
  • That spending spree was fueled in large part by a mad scramble to qualify for federal tax credits that were set to expire at the end of last year (but were ultimately renewed by Congress).
  • Wind-generated electricity met about 3.4 percent of of American demand in 2012, a figure that’s expected to reach 4.2 percent next year.
  • $120 billion spent on wind turbines since 2003 has increased wind power supplies 1,000 percent and created as much new electricity generation as could be provided by 14 new nuclear power plants.

In addition to federal tax credits, state-level renewable energy requirements are helping to spur wind’s growth, and the nuclear industry thinks that’s unfair:

Wind power has two advantages. Green energy laws in many states require utilities to buy wind energy under long-term contracts as part of their clean-energy goals and take that power even when they don’t need it. Wind farms also receive a federal tax credit of $22 for every megawatt-hour generated.

Thus, even when there is no demand for the power they produce, operators keep turbines spinning, sending their surplus to the grid because the tax credit assures them a profit. …

Meanwhile, nuclear and coal plants mustcontinue running even as this “negative pricing” dynamic forces them to pay grid operators to take the power they produce.

“It is becoming more pronounced as more wind is coming on,” Christopher Crane, chief executive officer of Chicago-based Exelon Corp. (EXC), said in a phone interview.

If the push to “over-develop” subsidized wind continues, “there is a very high probability that existing safe, reliable nuclear plants will no longer be competitive and will have to be retired early,” according to Crane.

But Exelon, the biggest nuclear-power producer in the country, gets plenty of government help itself. A 2011report from the Union of Concerned Scientists found that the nuclear power industry wouldn’t even be viable without government support: “more than 30 subsidies have supported every stage of the nuclear fuel cycle, from uranium mining to long-term waste storage.”

And wind turbines don’t generate toxic waste or nuclear meltdowns.

John Upton is a science aficionado and green news junkie who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.
READ MORE: CLIMATE & ENERGY
________________________________________
Comment: If the past ten year trend continues, wind power can replace nuclear power within 8 years, without unsafe unassured nuclear waste storage for tens of thousand of years, nuclear disasters (diseases, radiation leak, meltdown, etc.), no polluters pay principles, but public pay principle (subsidies all through loans, mining, processing, … even disaster insurance, leak treatment, decommission,…).

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 39 other followers