Skip to main content

Japan and France: Nuclear Energy Points the Way

Back in 1959, director Alain Resnais released a film that has since become a classic. Called Hiroshima Mon Amour, it posited a love affair between a Japanese engineer and a French actress. As the title suggests, the relationship founders on the issue of a defining moment of modern history both western and eastern.

No debates, please, and the film is a masterpiece that chokes off debate anyway. In the real world, here comes a different defining moment:

The prime ministers of Japan and France said Friday they wanted to put global warming high on the agenda for the Group of Eight summit and hailed nuclear power as a way to reduce carbon emissions.

And here's some more:

In a joint statement, [French Prime Minister Francois] Fillon and [Japanese Prime Minister Yasuo] Fukuda said they "share the same vision of nuclear energy's paramount role for prosperity and sustainable development in the 21st century."

The two countries have chosen nuclear power "as a key component of their energy plans to ensure energy that is safe, competitive and without CO2 emissions," the statement said.

France is the only G8 member to rely on nuclear energy for most of its power and has actively promoted nuclear technology overseas.

Japan comes in second in the G8 with about one-third of its energy coming via nuclear plants, despite visible public opposition in the only nation that has been attacked with atomic bombs.

We're in no way competent to mediate the Japanese relationship with the atom, except to acknowledge that it is complex and goes to the heart of what must be remembered and what can be forgot.

Regardless, the way forward is as clear as the sky that surrounds a nuclear energy plant. France and Japan have advanced to a point where they demonstrate by example all the qualities the pro-nuclear crowd has touted all along. Clean, safe, affordable - arguments against it just wither away like a relationship grown cold.

Comments

gunter said…
Well, it's not all wine and roses for the Japan

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5h4Cf9tSEuzyuQslZJgVUA-43yPmw

700 Japanese antinuclear protesters rallied in protest of the nuclear sales meeting by French Prime Minister Francois Fillon and Japanese Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda.

What do you think the costs are now for the still shutdown Fukishima nuclear power complex which scrammed during the last earthquake?
David Bradish said…
You mean the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear station? Until the units come back online, the costs for its shutdown are probably very large considering Japan now has to import expensive natural gas to meet its demand. The plant's shutdown is further evidence of its importance of providing low-cost energy to the country. Counter-intuitive to what you're trying to say, don't you think?

By the way, are you ever going to answer my question? Your silence indicates that NIRS and Beyond Nuclear aren't as pure as some may think. Otherwise, you would be shouting it from the roof. I'm obviously not going to get anything from you (didn't expect to) but we're going to do the research. We'll let you know what we find.
gunter said…
Just offering this as a classic example of why nuclear power, as a large centralized generate, needs as large sources of spinning reserve.
David Bradish said…
Is there a magical source out there that doesn't need backup power?
gunter said…
No, but the larger the centralized generator source the larger the chunk of energy that is simultaneously lost---hence more cost for backup power when its down for extended outages like the Japanese reactor complex.

David ---- Regarding your request, I find that I actually don't have your email address. Can you please formally submit your request to Beyond Nuclear for our filing information?
David Bradish said…
Paul,

I could understand that argument a few decades ago when there was much less capacity on the grid. But now since the U.S. has about 1,000 GW of capacity, it's able to compensate for unplanned outages very easily. Not only that, if any source of power is to make some sort of difference to the grid, a lot gigawatts are needed, not small megawatts.
perdajz said…
Gunter isn't thinking this through logically, and as always, he doesn't compare apples to apples.

Yes, it is very expensive for Japan whenever Kashiwazaki-Kariwa shuts down. As David Bradish points out quite correctly, this only demonstrates how valuable nuclear power is to Japan. Moreover, the plant was not significantly damaged by the earthquake, and will come back online sometime soon. The only reason it is down so long is the rigorous and indefatigable adherence to public health and safety attendant with operating a NPP.

For Gunter's point to make sense, he must identify some other source of Japanese electrical power, to the tune of 8000 MW, that would have performed flawlessly in response to a very severe earthquake. But he can't make this point. There isn't such a source. As fossil fuel plants are free to pollute even under the best of circumstances, it makes no sense to discuss their response to an earthquake. And Gunter's favorite sources of solar and wind are not availabe in sufficient quantities to replace KK station. There's also no reason to believe that 8000 MW of wind and solar power could withstand a 7.5 Richter scale earthquake unscathed.
Demesure said…
Like always, long and costly nuclear shutdowns are due to administrative medling to throw some bones to most hysterical anti-nuclear voters. And like always, those are the same people who complaint about the costs of nuclear.

That's how here in France, the socialist government who took power thanks to an alliance with the then ballistic Green party (which now has less than 1.5% voices at the last French presidential elections and no seat in parliament) and who had an environment minister from the Green (Dominique Voynet) killed the fast reactor SuperPhenix.

Popular posts from this blog

Sneak Peek

There's an invisible force powering and propelling our way of life.
It's all around us. You can't feel it. Smell it. Or taste it.
But it's there all the same. And if you look close enough, you can see all the amazing and wondrous things it does.
It not only powers our cities and towns.
And all the high-tech things we love.
It gives us the power to invent.
To explore.
To discover.
To create advanced technologies.
This invisible force creates jobs out of thin air.
It adds billions to our economy.
It's on even when we're not.
And stays on no matter what Mother Nature throws at it.
This invisible force takes us to the outer reaches of outer space.
And to the very depths of our oceans.
It brings us together. And it makes us better.
And most importantly, it has the power to do all this in our lifetime while barely leaving a trace.
Some people might say it's kind of unbelievable.
They wonder, what is this new power that does all these extraordinary things?

A Design Team Pictures the Future of Nuclear Energy

For more than 100 years, the shape and location of human settlements has been defined in large part by energy and water. Cities grew up near natural resources like hydropower, and near water for agricultural, industrial and household use.

So what would the world look like with a new generation of small nuclear reactors that could provide abundant, clean energy for electricity, water pumping and desalination and industrial processes?

Hard to say with precision, but Third Way, the non-partisan think tank, asked the design team at the Washington, D.C. office of Gensler & Associates, an architecture and interior design firm that specializes in sustainable projects like a complex that houses the NFL’s Dallas Cowboys. The talented designers saw a blooming desert and a cozy arctic village, an old urban mill re-purposed as an energy producer, a data center that integrates solar panels on its sprawling flat roofs, a naval base and a humming transit hub.

In the converted mill, high temperat…

Seeing the Light on Nuclear Energy

If you think that there is plenty of electricity, that the air is clean enough and that nuclear power is a just one among many options for meeting human needs, then you are probably over-focused on the United States or Western Europe. Even then, you’d be wrong.

That’s the idea at the heart of a new book, “Seeing the Light: The Case for Nuclear Power in the 21st Century,” by Scott L. Montgomery, a geoscientist and energy expert, and Thomas Graham Jr., a retired ambassador and arms control expert.


Billions of people live in energy poverty, they write, and even those who don’t, those who live in places where there is always an electric outlet or a light switch handy, we need to unmake the last 200 years of energy history, and move to non-carbon sources. Energy is integral to our lives but the authors cite a World Health Organization estimate that more than 6.5 million people die each year from air pollution.  In addition, they say, the global climate is heading for ruinous instability. E…