If ...The Lights Go Out

I just started reading James Lovelock's new book, The Revenge of Gaia, and I've already tripped over some interesting passages in his chapter on energy sources. It was in that chapter that I read about a BBC program that aired in 2004 entitled, If ... The Lights Go Out. Here's a description:

In the first episode, set in the winter of 2010, Britain is struggling to generate enough electricity to cope with demand. Most of our gas reserves in the North Sea have been used up and the country is already heavily dependent on imported gas to generate electricity, most of which we buy from Russia. At that time gas fuels almost 60% of UK electricity generation, and renewables (mostly wind) 10%. Coal and nuclear have fallen to about 16% each. A terrorist attack on a gas pipeline in Russia cuts off much of the UK’s gas supply. This incident coincides with prolonged cold and calm weather, causing massive power cuts in the East and South of England with devastating effects.

[...]

Such a scenario is neither implausible nor sensationalist, but could occur as a direct result of our current energy policy. In an electricity market that provides little incentive to generators to invest in new capacity, with coal and nuclear stations coming to the ends of their useful lives, and increased reliance on intermittent wind and gas imports for the bulk of our generating capacity, Britain’s security of electricity supply will be in serious jeopardy. According to research by Professor John Gittus, Britain could move from being the most to the least energy self-sufficient country among the developed nations within 20 years.

In the wake of the program, the BBC asked viewers if Britain should keep its nuclear plants (see left).

More details, here. There are all sorts of drawbacks to overreliance on Russian natural gas.

Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Environment, Energy, Politics, Technology, Electricity, Nuclear Power, James Lovelock, Climate Change, Global Warming, GHG, Russia

Comments

Wednesday Update

From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin...

Fluor Invests in NuScale

You know, it’s kind of sad that no one is willing to invest in nuclear energy anymore. Wait, what? NuScale Power celebrated the news of its company-saving $30 million investment from Fluor Corp. Thursday morning with a press conference in Washington, D.C. Fluor is a design, engineering and construction company involved with some 20 plants in the 70s and 80s, but it has not held interest in a nuclear energy company until now. Fluor, which has deep roots in the nuclear industry, is betting big on small-scale nuclear energy with its NuScale investment. "It's become a serious contender in the last decade or so," John Hopkins, [Fluor’s group president in charge of new ventures], said. And that brings us to NuScale, which had run into some dark days – maybe not as dark as, say, Solyndra, but dire enough : Earlier this year, the Securities Exchange Commission filed an action against NuScale's lead investor, The Michael Kenwood Group. The firm "misap...

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...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog