Counting the Cost in the California Heat Wave

As the California heat wave continues, the state is beginning to count the cost in human lives:

Across the state, the death toll continued to climb, with more than 60 Californians believed to have died from the record heat wave. One of the hardest-hit counties was Fresno, where hospitals were filled to capacity and the morgue ran out of room.

"On a usual day, our doctors will probably autopsy three to four people at the most," said county Coroner Loralee Cervantes. "By noon today, we've already done three autopsies. We're working all hands on deck right now. This morning I was truly nervous about the capacity of our facility and our ability to keep up."

In some areas of the morgue, bodies were being doubled up on gurneys because of lack of space, she said. The morgue was holding 43 bodies Wednesday, 20 of which were suspected of being heat-related deaths.

They included Araxie Long, 82, and her son, Carl Long Jr., 53, found dead inside their two-bedroom Fresno home Tuesday morning by a relative who went to check on them. Neighbors said that, probably to prevent high electricity bills, the pair did not like to use their air conditioner, though it worked.

The next time anti-nuclear activists in California talk about closing San Onofre and Diablo Canyon, think about what life in the state would be like without those reactors. I think it's safe to say that reserve margins would be lower, electricity would be more expensive, and air quality would be that much worse.

While plenty of activists like to portray Americans wasting energy in order to live lives of convenience, the reality is that availability of affordable and reliable electricity is not a matter of mere convenience, it's a matter of life and death.

One last thought: According to a study released by the International Atomic Energy Agency in September 2005, less than 50 deaths were directly attributable to the Chernobyl disaster.

UPDATE: More sad news.

Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Power, Environment, Energy, Politics, Technology, Economics, Electricity, California, Los Angeles, Silicon Valley, Fresno

Comments

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

Several weeks ago Joshua Pearce at Clarion University in Pennsylvania released a study titled “ Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy deployment as a greenhouse gas mitigation technology .” In the study he stated... nuclear energy production would have to increase by 10.5% per year from 2010 to 2050 to both replace fossil-fuel-energy use and meet the future energy demands. This line, of course, made the headlines and has been picked up by several outlets and blogs . When looking into his calculations for this statement, he made one assumption error that overstated the above sentence by nearly a factor of three. Page 121, Section 4.1 of the study states: Richard Smalley pointed out that in 2004, the global economy consumed the equivalent of 220 million barrels of oil per day, which converted into electricity terms is the equivalent of 14.5 TeraWatts (TW), or 14,500,000 MegaWatts (MW) (2005). … With a nuclear plant having about 1000 MW (1 GW) of capacity, we would need 14,500...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog