nuclear-news

1.5C Limit ‘Only Option’ For Saving Earth’s Ice And Snow

Allowing global temperatures to rise two degrees Celsius above
pre-industrial levels will be catastrophic for the world’s ice sheets,
glaciers, polar seas and permafrost, a new report warned Thursday.

The assessment of the global “cryosphere” — parts of the Earth covered in ice
and snow for at least some of the year — urges upcoming climate talks to
commit to keeping warming below 1.5C. “Because of what we have learned
about the cryosphere since the Paris Agreement was signed in 2015, 1.5C is
not merely preferable to 2C. It is the only option,” the report argues.
“This continued rise in carbon dioxide is unacceptable. The melting point
of ice pays no attention to rhetoric, only to our actions.”

Barrons 16th Nov 2023

https://www.barrons.com/news/1-5c-limit-only-option-for-saving-earth-s-ice-and-snow-b8f8e1ef

November 20, 2023 Posted by Christina Macpherson | climate change | Leave a comment

US, UK to Push Pledge to Triple Nuclear Power by 2050 at COP28

Nov 14, 2023, John Ainger, Rachel Morison and Akshat Rathi, Bloomberg News

(Bloomberg) — The US will lead a push at the COP28 climate summit to triple the amount of installed nuclear power capacity globally by 2050, marking a major turnaround for the controversial technology at the climate negotiations.

The declaration will call on the World Bank and other international financial institutions to include nuclear energy in their lending policies, according to a document seen by Bloomberg News. The US will likely be joined by the UK, France, Sweden, Finland and South Korea in the pledge to be signed Dec. 1 in Dubai, according to people familiar with the matter.

That will be followed a few days later by a nuclear industry commitment to triple generation resources from 2020 levels, said one of the people, who asked not to be named because the information isn’t public. 

“Nuclear is 100% part of the solution,” John Kerry, the US special presidential envoy for climate, said at the Bloomberg New Economy Forum last week. “It’s clean energy.”

The countries recognize “the key role of nuclear energy in achieving global net-zero greenhouse gas emissions/carbon neutrality by or around mid-century,” a draft of the declaration says. ……….

The declaration is the latest sign of shifting sentiment toward nuclear power, which doesn’t produce carbon dioxide emissions, but has often been criticized over the waste it generates, the cost of building plants and potential security issues. ……… The countries will also commit to new technologies, such as small modular reactors.

……  The US is discussing nuclear cooperation agreements with Kenya and Ghana, and renewing a pact with South Africa, according to Joshua Volz, the US Department of Energy’s deputy assistant secretary for Europe, Eurasia, Africa and the Middle East.

……………… The United Nations’ 28th Conference of the Parties, known as COP28, will take place in the United Arab Emirates, which is the only country in the Arabian Peninsula with a nuclear power program. It’s not clear if the hosts will sign……. https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/us-uk-to-push-pledge-to-triple-nuclear-power-by-2050-at-cop28-1.1998524

November 16, 2023 Posted by Christina Macpherson | climate change | 2 Comments

Is Nuclear Energy Really the Solution for a Greener Future?

Misconceptions about nuclear power

by Jade-Allegra Galli, November 6, 2023, https://www.mcgilldaily.com/2023/11/is-nuclear-energy-really-the-solution-for-a-greener-future/

In a world grappling with the urgent need to combat climate change, the debate surrounding nuclear power remains a disputable and often misunderstood topic. Nuclear power has been praised as an alternative to fuels and a potential solution to global warming as it does not emit greenhouse gasses unlike the commonly used energies. However, like any energy source, nuclear power has its drawbacks that significantly impact safety and the environment.

One of the concerns around nuclear power is the handling of radioactive waste. This waste needs to be segregated or diluted in order to render it safe and prevent radionuclides from leaking into the atmosphere. Repositories are one of the current arrangements – a subterranean, excavated facility created, built, and run for the long-term, safe and secure disposal of high-level waste. In Canada, the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) plans to “contain and isolate all the country’s used nuclear fuel – including that created by new and emerging technologies – in a deep geological repository, using multiple-barrier systems.” This will translate into the building of 500 meters (1,640 feet) deep area, called geological repository, which will rely on a multiple-bar- rier system where each barrier is part of the system but provides a higher level of security since each next barrier will come into play if some where to deteriorate. Regretfully, there are hazards associated with them. There is a chance that these repositories will experience breaches and spills that could contaminate the environment and pose long-term health problems since the decay rate for radio- active material is very slow, remaining extremely dangerous for thousands of years, accumulating very rapidly. As Gerald S. Frankel stated: “It’s a societal problem that has been handed down to us from our parent’s generation, And we are – more or less – handing it to our children.” Some age-old containers have begun leaking their toxic contents and, with more than a quarter million metric tons of radioactive waste, it is now time to truly investigate a long term solution to store these harmful chemicals before it is too late and before this becomes a bigger problem than it already is.

Another danger of nuclear power is the risk of major accidents and mishaps. The specter of accidents and meltdowns haunt the legacy of nuclear energy with two notable disasters serving as stark reminders of the possible catastrophic results of using nuclear energy. The shadows of the nuclear meltdowns, such as the Chernobyl disaster of 1986 and the Fukushima Daiichi accident in 2011, haunt the nuclear power industry. These events not only endangered the lives of the workers at the affected power plants but also released large amounts of radiation into the environment, leading to long-lasting damage to the environment and severe health issues for nearby populations. The prospect of future accidents leading to similar magnitudes of disasters continues to cast a dark shadow over the nuclear industry, demanding unwavering diligence and stringent safety when handling such powers if there continues to be a pursuit of nuclear energy to achieve a “greener” world. The high costs of nuclear power plants that are fully safe are difficult to justify. Nuclear power is more expensive than renewables, around $112-189 per megawatt hour (MWh) compared to $26-56 MWh for onshore wind and $36-44 MWh for solar power, while being exponentially more unsafe. Additionally, the slow development of power plants delays the progress to fight climate change as in the meantime we rely on polluting fossil fuels to generate the needed energy for daily activities. All of these factors, in addition to its dangerous nature, form an unjustifiable case to use this energy form to address the issue of greenhouse gasses.

With nuclear energy being so destructive, it has to be considered that some people or terrorist organizations might want to use it as a catalyst for mass destruction. As Zambia’s speaker stated at the UN thematic debate on nuclear weapons: “Nuclear weapons have no place in the modern world and there is no justification for their proliferation, testing and stock- piling. Their destructive power has fuelled international tensions and created an uncertain, unsafe world. Relying on deterrence for security only perpetuates a cycle of fear, where mutually assured destruction looms over the world community.” Terrorist attacks might target nuclear power facilities and the materials they employ, resulting in potential theft of radioactive materials and seriously jeopardizing national security.

Nuclear power facilities have sturdy engineering facilities built to survive catastrophic natural calamities like hurricanes, tornadoes, and earthquakes. But because they aren’t built to resist strikes from missiles and airstrikes, they are the golden target for war crimes. Only a little over a year ago, Russia attacked Ukraine’s electricity infrastructure with a series of airstrikes. Of the forty-three cruise missiles used in the strike, thirty-six were shot down by Ukrainian air defense troops and the remaining missiles struck western and central Ukrainian energy infrastructures. This shows how the use of hybrid warfare tactics, more specifically on energy infra- structures, is a growing concern in the modern world. While the Russian attack on Ukraine was largely contained, it serves as a stark reminder of the vulnerabilities in our energy systems, particularly highlighting the need for diversified energy sources and a strong focus on its security. Nuclear energy, while capable of providing a significant power output, is also susceptible to similar attacks and poses a far greater set of risks. Such large-scale attacks would have resulted in catastrophic consequences if the attacked infrastructures were nuclear, resulting in flying debris and radiation. In the face of such threats, it is crucial to prioritize the development and implementation of alternative and renewable energy sources that are less vulnerable to geopolitical conflicts and sabotage, ensuring a more stable and resilient energy future as we can- not afford for these accidents to happen.

In the next few years, as we search for more sustainable energy sources, we must carefully weigh the trade-offs related to nuclear power. Developing a comprehensive strategy to tackle climate change without sacrificing environmental responsibility, safety, or security requires finding a balance between the benefits and drawbacks that come with it. Amidst all the information and confusion, it is also important to acknowledge that even if nuclear energy isn’t an ideal solution for a perfectly green future, the current widely used methods like fossil fuels, coal, and oil still represent a threat and silently kill millions of people every year worldwide. #nuclear #antinuclear #nuclearfree #NoNukes #climate

November 8, 2023 Posted by Christina Macpherson | climate change | Leave a comment

We can now only stay under 1.5°C target if we achieve net zero by 2034

The amount of carbon dioxide we can still emit to have just a 50 per cent
chance of limiting warming to 1.5°C is even smaller than previously
thought.

To have just a 50/50 chance of limiting warming to 1.5°C, the
world must keep future emissions to about 220 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide,
according to the latest estimate. With annual emissions at around 40
gigatonnes and still rising, we are on course to exceed this by 2029 or
earlier.

As a result, keeping that 1.5°C goal alive now requires us to hit
net-zero globally by 2034 rather than by 2050, says Joeri Rogelj at
Imperial College London. “There are no social or technical scenarios in
the scientific literature that even describe how that would be possible.”

However, it is still feasible to limit warming to well below 2°C, says
Robin Lamboll, also at Imperial College. To have a 50/50 chance of keeping
warming to 2°C, the world must not emit more than 1200 gigatonnes of CO2
(GtCO2). This wouldn’t be exceeded until 2046 if emissions continue at
current levels.

 New Scientist 30th Oct 2023

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2400140-we-can-now-only-stay-under-1-5c-target-if-we-achieve-net-zero-by-2034/

November 7, 2023 Posted by Christina Macpherson | climate change | Leave a comment

Deep divisions could hamper progress at the UN’s crucial COP28 climate summit

There are already signs that deep divisions could hamper progress at the
UN’s crucial COP28 climate summit. More than 70 environment ministers and
100 national delegations have been meeting in Abu Dhabi ahead of talks that
begin in Dubai on November 30. Many delegates doubt that a summit hosted by
a petrostate – the United Arab Emirates – can shepherd the world towards a
low carbon future. This year is on track to be the hottest ever recorded
globally. That makes the urgent need for action clearer than ever. In Abu
Dhabi this week Mr Al Jaber was at pains to lay to rest any doubts about
his ambitions for the main talks. He restated that the key goal would be
keeping the world on track to limiting temperature rise to 1.5C above
pre-industrial levels. Scientists say that should provide a good chance of
avoiding the worst impacts of climate change. And Mr Al Jaber accepted that
achieving that will require deep emissions cuts.

BBC 31st Oct 2023

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-67271688 #climate

November 2, 2023 Posted by Christina Macpherson | climate change | Leave a comment

Future of fossil fuels leaves nations at odds ahead of UN climate summit

The world’s nations remained at odds over any agreement for an end to new
oil and gas projects ahead of the upcoming UN climate summit, with France,
Spain, Ireland, Kenya and 11 other countries calling for the phasing out of
fossil fuel production at preliminary talks this week.

After discussions
over the past two days in Abu Dhabi in preparation for the COP28 summit
that kicks off in the United Arab Emirates on November 30, the group of 15
nations known as the High Ambition Coalition joined a cohort of countries
pushing for a global accord to dump oil and gas.

“Fossil fuels are at the
root of this crisis. We must work together to develop a comprehensive
global clean energy access approach to accelerate the transition away from
fossil fuels,” said a statement signed by 15 ministers, including some
from poorer countries such as Ethiopia, Vanuatu and Samoa.

FT 1st Nov 2023

https://www.ft.com/content/6428fe5a-33ef-4094-8859-227bed4b545d

November 2, 2023 Posted by Christina Macpherson | climate change | Leave a comment

Earth close to ‘risk tipping points’ that will damage our ability to deal with climate crisis, warns UN

Humanity is moving dangerously close to irreversible tipping points that
would drastically damage our ability to cope with disasters, UN researchers
have warned, including the withdrawal of home insurance from flood-hit
areas and the drying up of the groundwater that is vital for ensuring food
supplies.

These “risk tipping points” also include the loss of the
mountain glaciers that are essential for water supplies in many parts of
the world and accumulating space debris knocking out satellites that
provide early warnings of extreme weather.

A new report from the UN
University (UNU) in Germany has set out a series of risk tipping points
that are approaching, but said having foresight of these meant that it
remained possible to take action to prevent them. Tipping points are
triggered by small increases in their driving force but rapidly lead to
large impacts.

Guardian 25th Oct 2023

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/25/climate-crisis-threatens-tipping-point-of-uninsurable-homes-says-un #climate #globalheating

October 29, 2023 Posted by Christina Macpherson | climate change | Leave a comment

Al Gore on why the ‘deck is stacked against’ COP28

Al Gore kicked off the Moral Money Summit Americas yesterday with an
impassioned attack on the “buddy-buddy” relationship between political
leaders and the fossil fuel industry, which he said was threatening the
prospects for global climate action.

“We need to remove the political
obstacles and opposition being put in place by the fossil fuel companies
that use their legacy network of financial and political ties and lobbying
and campaign contributions . . . for the destruction of humanity’s
future,” the former US vice-president and chair of Generation Investment
Management told me.

A month before the start of the UN’s COP28 climate
conference in Dubai, Gore warned that “the deck is stacked against a
successful outcome”, in part due to the appointment of Sultan al-Jaber,
chief executive of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company, as its president.

FT 25th Oct 2023

https://www.ft.com/content/be225dc7-e230-4a50-9751-29843b23cb3c

October 29, 2023 Posted by Christina Macpherson | climate change | Leave a comment

How “Dumb Money” Nukes Boil & Bankrupt The Earth

So today’s real reactor battle is not over new ones, which essentially don’t exist.

It’s about the risks posed by the old ones, all of which lack comprehensive liability insurance.

Harvey Wasserman 10 Oct 23  https://www.downwithtyranny.com/post/how-dumb-money-nukes-boil-bankrupt-the-earth

No new U.S. reactors, big or small, fission or fusion will be built here within at least the next five years…more like ten. Those that try will do nothing but divert resources away from the Solartopian technologies needed to save the Earth.

They’ll also lose big money for their billionaire backers and the taxpayers who’ll be forced to bail them out.

There are now 93 large uninsured light-water reactors licensed for operation in the US. One more– Georgia’s Vogtle #4– may open within the next year or so.

All of them emit radioactive Carbon-14. They release additional greenhouse gasses through the process of mining, milling and enriching uranium-based fuel, as well as attempting to store it once it’s become radioactive waste.

All commercial reactors burn at ~570 degrees Fahrenheit, warming the planet on their own.

Meanwhile, there are zero such commercial nukes in the pipeline. None are under construction.

No credible observer– pro-nuke or no nuke– contends that any large new reactor could be ordered, built, licensed, insured and brought on line in the United States within the next decade or two… well beyond whatever window we might have to solve our worsening climate crisis.

The whole industry, which is inseparable from the nuclear weapons complex, was sold to the public on the premise that its electricity would come “too cheap to meter.”

But consider the last eight major reactor projects in the US and Europe:

Finland’s Olkiluoto3 opened last year, billions of Euros over budget and more than a decade behind its original 2009 promise date. Though brand new, it’s already been forced to scale back operations at least once due to a massive influx of far cheaper solar/wind/hydro-generated electricity.

France’s Flamanville remains under construction, also years late and billions over budget.

Two reactors at England’s Hinckley, again years late, have soared beyond E35 billion. Odds on them ever opening are up for grabs. Odds on them ever cost competing with wind or solar are less than zero.

Two huge reactors at VC Summer are stillborn. Their $9 billion in construction costs have stuck South Carolina with a dusty mausoleum that will never generate power.

After fifteen years, Georgia’s Vogtle #3 has finally gone critical. Unit #4 may open next year. Projected in 2008 at $14 billion, the pair together may yet exceed $40 billion. They’ll certainly be the last big light water reactors built in the U.S.

Together Summer and Vogtle bankrupted Westinghouse. The European projects have bankrupted Electricite de France.

Thus Wall Street’s unwillingness to fund big new nukes is likely to deepen.

So now we hear instead about “Small Modular Reactors.” With backing from the likes of Bill Gates and Oliver Stone, the idea of mass producing small, simple nukes claims major media fandom. The critiques of SMRs are widespread and varied.

But there’s no more hilarious proviso than one coming from the industry itself, in the form of a sort of disclaimer from NuScale in a recent announcement. The list of “warnings” resembles one we hear on the air for various prescription drugs, but stretches in length to resemble a documentary film, practically matching this article in length. Take a look by scrolling down to the section that begins “Forward Looking Statements.” You may want to settle in with a cup of coffee.

At this point, there are currently no proven SMR prototypes. Cost projections again recall that 1950s “too cheap to meter” lie told by Atomic Energy Commission Chair Lewis Strauss (the villain in the film Oppenheimer).

NuScale’s promised delivery date has already slipped from 2026 to 2029. Independent assessments put that well into the 2030s. The billions squandered on such projects divert capital that should otherwise fund renewables.

Likewise much-hyped thorium reactors, which remain untested, unproven, and of uncertain costs.

As for fusion, its operations would concentrate temperatures of 100 million degrees Fahrenheit on an increasingly fragile planet. And that despite decades of intense research, and gargantuan expenditures, its future availability, ecological impacts and financial costs remain naggingly uncertain.

Thus, in the vital window from now until decade’s end, no new nukes, large or small, fission or fusion, will be ready to tangibly replace the burning of fossil fuels. The once-beloved nuclear genie can’t cure global boiling. There’s simply no there there.

Which makes our current fleet of atomic elders even more dangerous. Thoroughly decayed reactors like California’s Diablo Canyon and Michigan’s Palisades soak up billions in public funds to keep operating. But they’ve yet to secure comprehensive liability insurance. At a current average age of more than forty (Diablo opened in 1985) they cost far more to operate than proven, readily available wind, solar, battery and efficiency technologies.

Diablo in particular is plagued by deadly flaws such as embrittlement, cracked pipes, seismic vulnerability, an aging workforce and much more.

So today’s real reactor battle is not over new ones, which essentially don’t exist.

It’s about the risks posed by the old ones, all of which lack comprehensive liability insurance.

And about how quickly we can bury at last the immensely powerful fossil fuel industry that threatens us all.

For that, the only clear solution comes with a fast-as-possible shift to safer, cleaner, cheaper truly green Solartopian renewables that actually do exist. That are constantly evolving.

They may not be too cheap to meter (except in rare cases, like nighttime wind power in west Texas).

But they comprise today’s last, best hope to cool our boiling Earth…while creating jobs and profit for those wise enough to see it now. #nuclear #antinuclear #NuclearFree #NoNukes

October 11, 2023 Posted by Christina Macpherson | climate change | 2 Comments