Considering nuclear power

[Uwila]

I just wonder what people think of the possibility of a revival of nuclear power. With price of oil and gas these days, are we prepared to look at nuclear as an option. Just wondered if any has an opion pn the matter?

Below copied from \lin{http://www.forbes.com/business/feeds/afx/2006/04/28/afx2705263.html\Forbes}

LONDON (AFX) - Prime Minister Tony Blair has taken a firm decision to back the building of a new generation of nuclear power plants as part of the review of the country's energy needs that will be published this summer, the Financial Times reported.

Without citing sources the newspaper said Blair has taken the view that it will be impossible to use other clean technologies such as wind power or clean coal to make up the 20 pct of Britain's energy needs currently provided by the nuclear sector.

The FT said he has therefore removed the last remaining doubt about whether the government would renew the UK's nuclear programme and has given the green light for a policy statement, expected to be followed by a white paper, to back nuclear power later this year.

[email protected]

\link{http://www.forbes.com/business/feeds/afx/2006/04/28/afx2705263.html\Forbes}

If I was the gvt, I would tackle the enmormous wastage of energy before commissioning new nuclear power stations.
I would make icompulsory for all new-builds to have solar panels, and be energy efficient in many ways (including 'water harvesting' - producing clean water must use electricity!)
I would make it illegal to keep lights on in public buildings over night (£123 billion worth of electricity every year!), I would abolish 'standby' buttons on all household gadgets so that people actually had to turn them OFF, move towards banning decorative light displays - such as christmas lights, unless powered by sustainable power, look at different rates of charging for 'essential' and 'non-essential' electricity use, ...

Wow, Blu. There loads of topics in your post. How would you define essentil and non-essential uses? And how would regulate?

Regarding night time lighting, what if it is for security purposes?

I think conservation is a good idea, but how would you regulate it? Also I don't think an argument for conseravtion replaces the one for nuclear power vs fissil fuels (and et's face those are currently the only options).

I agree that it doesn't completely cover the fossil / nuclear fuel argument, but I honestly don't think we should be having that argument without questioning the amount of electricity we really need. We don't need all that for 'security'. (just one light per room on a sensor, perhaps). I would be happy to pay a bit more for electricity for my TV, stereo, etc etc etc than for my basic room light and heat.

The western world is absolutely pathetic in the way we complacently accept our 'need' for endless energy, imo.

Fossil fuel really will run out in 50 or so years, won't it?

Agree with Blu. One thing I find unbelievable is that as a householder I'm told to use energy saving lights and then around the middle of November the councils put up all those christmas lights!!!! as do numerous householders.

Also, have been reading an article on nuclear fusion (not fission) which sounds promising. Don't know a lot about it but according to the article - fuels for it are widely available in ordinary sea water, Only small amounts required ( 1kg of fusion fuel in a fusion power station will release the same energy as 1,000,000 kg of coal in a fossil fuel power station). Fusion is safer - if it becomes unstable it cools down and extinguishes itself, so no 'meltdown' accidents. Radioactive waste decay is 50-100yrs as compared with waste from fission being several thousand years.

Whe fossil fuel will run out (and if it will run out) is debatable. I would say 50 years is a very short estimate.

Personally, I think we are going to see a revival of nuclear power plants in the near future. And I don't mean just in the UK. Across Europe and around the world. The high prices we are now seeing in oil and gas arre forecasted to stay. I don't think it will skyrocket. But, I expect current levels to remain or rise (but not sharply) for the next few years anyway. And who can fford the bills? Certainly not me! So, I see us turning to nuclear. I'm sure if this is a good or bad thing, but I think I'm leaning towards supporting it.

Yes, conservation is a good thing. But, I think changing human behaviour is a tall order. Humans are set in there ways and resistant to these kids of adjustments in their busy lives. But,nonetheless, it is a good thing and I completely agree with you.

Interested to know more about fusion. What is the book? Is it a proven technology or a theory which needs more work.

Oooooo what the fuck lets just cancel christmas then and have done with it!!!

Sure there are far more things that use lots of energy that we don't really need - don't pick on poor old Xmas lights they make the kids smile which IMO is worth the spend!!!

Now we could just use one big hit of power to fry all the murderers rapists and paedophiles in jail today and save us loads on lighting their cells for the paltry remainders of their sentances!!!

Human behaviour is why we need a gvt to insist on some sensible and easy measures. Like more energy efficient homes.

They have building regulations for every minute thing in a new-build house, it would be EASY to make houses 20% more efficient. But fat cat developers can't be bothered / will not compromise profits while the cpmpetitoin are allowed to do otherwise. Energy efficiency measures would be so much cheaper to install if they were ubiquitous.

Nope - not JUST Christmas lights, all sorts of other non-enjoyable things too.

But, Blu, if you require builders to implement these things, the price will be passed to the buyer. And housing is already too expensive. Will that really be a good thing?

more about fusion \link{http://www.nagty.ac.uk/student_academy/aspire/documents/aspire_11.pdf\fusion info} read page options 6 and 7
\link{http://www.jet.efda.org/\jet tokamak}

Thanks, I found something too. Appears the problem is the engineering and economic obstacles which come with providing and containing an atmosphere of some 100 million Kelvin. And that is bloody hot!!!

So, I would ask for the purpose if this discussion that we not consider technologies which are not yet technically and/or econimically viable.

So, we are back to nuclear power vs. fossil fuels power.

Uwila - we already use very expensive and outdated building materials and design in this country. if ALL developers are required by lkaw to implement more efficient design and features, no it won't be more expensive, the price of those items will come down, as they will becime standard and mass-produced. And won't need 'specialist' fitters. And if houses are a little more expansive to buy, so what?
One way and another, we will have to pay for energy use beyone our capacity - whether it be for slightly more expensive houses (which will save money in the long run by having cheaper fuel bills), or taxes (one way or another) to pay for hugely expensive nuclear power stations, or in ways that are unthinkable but are to do with human costs - Chenobyl and iraq already loom quite large, and there is still no real solution to the disposal of nuclear waste - atm all the measures are simply about a holding operation of one kind or another.

I'd better just nail my colours to the mast here....was brought up in a 'nuclear' household .... literally. Dad used to work as an electrical engineer for the CEGB mainly working on nuclear power plants. He actually designed a mew form of nuclear fuel rod and used to drive around with a dummy one in his car boot for demos when he gave talks....that was always a good laugh if anyone opened his boot uninvited... . We used to have picnics on Hinkley beach ...just below the power station. So I am categorically not scared of nuclear power. I beleive it has some of the most stringent safety standards of any industry and that those in the UK are far higher than those in other countries such at the US (Three Mile Island anyone??) and the Ukraine (anyone remember a little incident at Chernobyl?). I personally think that it becamse a headline issue for the green movement back in the 70's mainly because it was associated with nuclear weapons research/manufacture.

Having said all that I do appreciate that the waste problem is a major one but the 3 main reasons nuclear power will never be a go-er is 1. public fear, 2. the economic cost is too high, 3. it would take decades for any new nuclear plant to come on-stream even if it were commissioned today so it isn't a quick fix.

Fission is a wonderful idea but it's been around for decades and no-one has ever really come near to making any usable energy. However I do agree that it's well worth investing time and money in further urgent research.

We need to cut down on what we use, research into some of the more unpalatable renewable possibilities - ie biofuels (yes some of us will have to put up with incinerators near our homes), wind farms (you might not like the look of them but tough) and the Severn barrage (and there are many people round here who aren't happy about that). It's a problem for all of us to deal with. There is no place for nimbyism in this area.

Just wanted to add that fossil fuels are not a solution long term either. But we all know that...

I agree about the research into other potential solutions - biofuels etc.
I like the look of windfarms, and don't understand the fuss against them. Dry stone walls wouldn't get planning permission if they were mooted for the first time now, but look at how affectionatley we regard them as part of our landscape now!

Severn barrage?

I totally agree about winfarms. "Oh I think it's ugly" isn't really a major envorinmental concern to me. "Oh it killed the fish and my baby two heads." is a valid concern.

The Severn Barrage is a plan to build a huge tidal barrage across the Severn estuary to harness power of the tides. It has the potential to produce a huge percentage of power - can't remember the figures but i know it's quite impressive. I think that Severn has one of the biggest tidal ranges in the world.

Not so good for the wetlands that mirating birds use but I'm sure there's a way round that. Might also prevent some of the really bad flooding that we get round here... hope so.

Oh cool, do you live near the severn bore? I saw it on telly the other night and I thought it was very cool. I want to go see it.

So are we looking at this short term or longer term?

According to the article the first demonstrator fusion power station is expected to come online around 2035. So if enough effort was put into it and estimates of fossil fuels running out is around 50 years, it sounds like something to get a bit excited about to me.

As far as I know windfarms aren't that conomically viable at the moment so are they out as well? And they are somewhat destructive of the environment too .

For now my personal favourite is solar panels.

Yep Uwila I do. It is quite good but it's at it's strongest further up - nearer Glos. I'm in Somerset.

I don't think 50 years is a realistic estimate. Let's not use it for the assumption. Some would argue the we are not going to run out of fossil fuels... ever. Now, that estimate is probably not right either.

Okay, are solar panels economically viable? I mean can the average person really afford them? What kind of maintenance is required? Are they covered by your house insurance? I think they have improved, but I don't think they are exactly cheap. I don't really know though. Does anyone have them?

Parking meters in our area are solar powered.

Do solar panels have to be on your roof/ i read (on MN as it happens!) that people run into trouble trying to fit them on Victorian rafters because of the weight - but could you have one on a pole in your garden?

I'd get one like a shot if it was in any way possible.