tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355086750486200439.post3737394129532256521..comments2024-03-24T19:55:32.537-05:00Comments on The View from This Seat: The Nuclear FixLKSeathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08860725174433173015noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355086750486200439.post-92145031064109275572011-03-26T14:36:24.430-05:002011-03-26T14:36:24.430-05:00I remember many years ago listening to my then pas...I remember many years ago listening to my then pastor, Dr. Bill LInk, preach against nuclear power. His logic was that it is simply too dangerous to manage. It may be. However, looking at the alternatives, I think we would be better to campaign for the best nuclear power, rather than for no nuclear power.<br /><br />It is said that the best is the enemy of the good, and that is exactly the kind of best nuclear power we need. The good nuclear power is causing disaster in Japan. Good is not good enough in nuclear power.<br /><br />The first step in a best nuclear power strategy would be a rational recycling program. One truly sad element in the current crisis is that a significant part of the problem is an excessive number of spent nuclear rods stored on the site of these aging nuclear plants. Yet it is a testimony to the remaining value in the spent rods that they are still so radioactive that their excess heat is truly dangerous. If we can ship new, full-power rods to the plants, we can ship spent rods to a recycling center, to be reprocessed into new rods, and much less radioactive waste. <br /><br />A second strategy echoes the parallel discovery of the problem at the BP oil well disaster last year, we lack the technology to resolve certain major disasters, technology we finally invented after-the-fact for oil wells. Robust, probably robotic, emergency control systems are needed. Some should be onsite, some should available within hours. We need to invent a safe way to kill a broken nuclear reactor.<br /><br />Improved passive security measures are needed. It is ridiculous that it is a major achievement to get cooling water into a broken core. We should have the reverse system, where a normally operating core is protected from emergency flooding.<br /><br />On the other hand, no nuclear reactor should be built in a tsunami flood plain. Well, for that matter, neither should any city. Where I live, in the American Midwest, we rebuilt a number of small cities after the floods of 1993 to relocate them on high ground near their original sites. I hope Japan considers doing that with both nuclear reactors and the cities they serve. Granted, some large established Midwestern cities lie behind protective levees. However, not even the Mississippi River floods like a tsunami.<br /><br />Obsolete nuclear plants should be phased out. Unending relicensing is just a way of gambling with the future. Indeed, even the "best" practices would be gambling with the future. However, some gambling seems unavoidable. The question is, can we be rational enough to stay in control of the forces we have set loose? As we have watched our banks, our oil wells, and our nuclear plants suffer recent meltdowns, the prospects are uncertain.Craig Dempseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00033176451913108084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355086750486200439.post-73472836325410434842011-03-26T11:29:37.844-05:002011-03-26T11:29:37.844-05:00A smile for the early, Gentle Anarchist motto: Spl...A smile for the early, Gentle Anarchist motto: Split wood not atoms.<br /><br />The third way will be unpalatable to many. Possibly a focus on the fourth or fifth way might be better. Much as in general relativity physics, there are other alternatives outside the box.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355086750486200439.post-33218254546606844592011-03-25T12:35:13.841-05:002011-03-25T12:35:13.841-05:00Indeed, speaking "realistically," you...Indeed, speaking "realistically," you're right. That's the problem. Being realistic doesn't make it any less irrational or suicidal. When I wrote, "the spiritual impoverishment of humanity," I wasn't talking about merely choosing between alternative forms of energy; I was talking about the much more fundamental inability to change "the energy needs of the world."Antonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03945285810893867079noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355086750486200439.post-83714182190616882892011-03-25T12:23:16.872-05:002011-03-25T12:23:16.872-05:00I fully agree that it is very sad that the choice ...I fully agree that it is very sad that the choice seems to be between nuclear energy or coal/gas energy. I am a big supporter of wind and solar energy, and other innovative energy sources. But the fact is: they cannot (or at least, in all probability, will not) be developed fast enough to meet the energy needs of the world.<br /><br />I wish there were enough people to follow the Third Way that I wrote about last time. That would include, among other things, a sizable reduction in energy consumption. That is likely not to happen. So, realistically, taking "the lesser of two evils" seems to be the prudent course of action.<br /><br />What other realistic solution to the energy problem is there? I am open to suggestions.LKSeathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08860725174433173015noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355086750486200439.post-65542188029381576322011-03-25T12:09:56.807-05:002011-03-25T12:09:56.807-05:00Here an important comment (received by e-mail) fro...Here an important comment (received by e-mail) from a Thinking Friend who doesn't often write:<br /><br />"I share your concerns about global warming, but I am also concerned about the first choice in combating that, seems to be nuclear. I feel that we should concentrate first on wind and solar energy. I also realize that many places cannot generate power from these sources, and must resort to nuclear. Thanks for bringing this problem to our attention.LKSeathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08860725174433173015noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355086750486200439.post-49724193973995957392011-03-25T11:48:43.284-05:002011-03-25T11:48:43.284-05:00This is one of the saddest posts of all. It unders...This is one of the saddest posts of all. It underscores the spiritual impoverishment of humanity that we don't have enough communal reason, vision and will to take a path apart from one that forces us to choose between nuclear power plants and coal-and-gas-powered plants for our energy usage. It makes me think of Gen. 6:5-6: "Yahweh saw that human wickedness was great on earth...and Yahweh regretted having made human beings on earth and was grieved at heart."Antonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03945285810893867079noreply@blogger.com