Skip to main content

"A Sad Story for Climate Change"

This is from the sub-only Climate Wire:
"I think CO2 emissions will increase tremendously in the next decades because more and more countries will use more coal like Germany. And that's a sad story [for] climate change," she said.
 
She is Claudia Kemfert, an energy economist at the German Institute of Economic Research in Berlin, so she knows her lumps of coal from lumps of uranium.

Another germane quote:
"We lack the necessary power lines to transmit wind-generated electricity from the north," said Johannes Teyssen, CEO of energy company E.ON. "This could lead to massive problems in the grid, even power outages."
Just gets better and better in Germany, doesn't it?

---


The Point Beach nuclear plant will be allowed to expand its power output by 17% this year, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission announced Tuesday.
Point Beach is in Wisconsin.
NextEra spokeswoman Sara Cassidy said Tuesday the expansion will increase total output by 170 megawatts, or enough to supply an additional 85,000 homes.
Or a bunch of hybrid cars.

The environmentalist in this story, Katie Nekola of Clean Wisconsin, tries a novel approach.
"It makes no sense that NRC rushed to approve the Point Beach expansion before completing their Fukushima safety review, especially when Wisconsin doesn't need the power,"
Odd argument, as environmentalist are usually pretty concerned about the future - and it's hard to deny we'll need more electricity generation sooner rather than later. Getting ready for it scarcely seems a bad idea.

Maybe Germany would like some of it in the meantime (if that were possible, of course.)

---
Standard & Poor's expects new nuclear projects being planned by Georgia Power and South Carolina Electric & Gas to proceed with "few material delays," the ratings agency said in a report released Tuesday.
Read the whole thing for more. This is about Vogtle (in Georgia) and Virgil C. Summer (in South Carolina).  I was a little puzzled by the timing of this report, but it seems recent enough to take account of Japan and the NRC's subsequent safety review:
The "primary challenge" for the utilities will likely be any design changes mandated by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission following a review of lessons learned from Fukushima, S&P said.
Fair enough.

Point Beach by moonlight.

Comments

SteveK9 said…
I think Germany may prove to be rather unique. And, of course they may end up buying a lot of their electricity from France (nuclear). That may hurt German competitiveness, but at least it isn't coal. When Germany brags about their wind turbines people should just keep putting up the numbers on the total contribution to German energy use from wind, coal, gas, etc. Germany is not green.

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…

Why Nuclear Plant Closures Are a Crisis for Small Town USA

Nuclear plants occupy an unusual spot in the towns where they operate: integral but so much in the background that they may seem almost invisible. But when they close, it can be like the earth shifting underfoot.

Lohud.com, the Gannett newspaper that covers the Lower Hudson Valley in New York, took a look around at the experience of towns where reactors have closed, because the Indian Point reactors in Buchanan are scheduled to be shut down under an agreement with Gov. Mario Cuomo.


From sea to shining sea, it was dismal. It wasn’t just the plant employees who were hurt. The losses of hundreds of jobs, tens of millions of dollars in payrolls and millions in property taxes depressed whole towns and surrounding areas. For example:

Vernon, Vermont, home to Vermont Yankee for more than 40 years, had to cut its municipal budget in half. The town closed its police department and let the county take over; the youth sports teams lost their volunteer coaches, and Vernon Elementary School lost th…