Please look up for the attachment: <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/india-unity/conversations/messages/55616>.
Dr. M. V. Ramana* recently made a presentation at the Department of Physics, The Ohio State University on the last Feb. 24 titled: 'Nuclear Energy After Fukushima.' The (60) slides that he used are attached herewith. Of course the verbal commentaries by Dr. Ramana, which were complemented by these slides, are not available here. What follows below is a brief explanatory note unaided by any idea about the actual commentaries. *The Presentation* The presentation is evidently divided into the following sections and sub-sections: 1. Why talk about nuclear power? 2. Nuclear power today 3. IAEA Projections 4. Ongoing Problems 5. Reactions to Fukushima 5A. Official/Government Reactions 5B. Public Reactions 6. Underlying Reasons for Public Perception 6A. Public concern 6B. Trust 7. Nuclear Safety 7A. Theoretical Concerns 7B. [Illustrations of actual experiences] 7C. What can we learn from failures? 7D. Hindsight 7E. Implications for Safety 8. Challenge: Economics 8A. Capital cost 9. Major factor affecting nuclear prospects 10. Questions about the future 1. Section 1 (slides 2-5) mainly draws attention to the loud noises by the nuclear industry and the media heralding a new "Nuclear Renaissance" with the developing countries playing the main driver, in the pre-Fukushima days. 2. Section 2 (slides 6-10) deals with the current status of nuclear power globally. It shows 439 reactors in 31 countries as on Fe. 23 2015. (Out of these 48 belong to Japan of which 4 are from the Fukushima plant which encountered a disastrous accident on March 11 2011. And the rest 44 were also shut down thereafter.) It also shows the the US, the largest producer of nuclear power, produces a tad less than 20% less than its electricity via the nuclear route (as on 2013). For the second largest producer France, this share is slightly higher than 70%. Globally nuclear power constituted 13.8% of total electricity produced in 2010 and it came down to 11% in 2013. The number of nuclear reactors added peaked during 1984 & 85. It went into negative for the first time in 1990. And the reduction in number of nuclear reactors peaked in 2010. In 2011 & 12 as well the net addition is negative. The average (weighted) construction time of a nuclear reactor is 96.6 months. 3. The first of the 3 slided (11-13) in this section brings out how the IAEA projection of future nuclear power generation (in 20130 and 2050) is steadily declining since 2010. The following slide also underlines the similar trend. It also highlighs that nuclear power is uniquely controversial among all electricity generation technologies. 4. Section 4, slide 14, draws attention to Fukushima disaster and the still ongoing problem. 5. Sub-section 5A, slides 15-22, brings out the fact of three widely divergent categories of government reactions. 6. Sub-section 5B, slides 23-26, brings out the fact strong adverse public reactions. 7. The following sub-section, slides 28-30, deals with public concern and the concept of "risk". 8. The next sub-section, slide 31, deals with the lack of public trust in nuclear industry. 9. The next section (slides 32-46), deals with the issue of "safety" - the theoretical dimensions as well as the actual experiences of the Fukushima disaster. ***A major conclusion drawn is: "Multiple safety systems are usually good, but sometimes lead to unexpected consequences because they interact with each other" and thereby could actually be counterproductive. And, another: "Bottom line: probability of accident at a nuclear power plant will remain uncertain - and certainly greater than zero."*** 10. This section cites the famous prediction that nuclear power would be too cheap to meter. And then goes on to show how that just not has been completely belied but also it has emerged as a too costly option. 11. The slide 53 concludes: Major factor[s] affecting nuclear prospects: uncertainty in cost and resultant risk / Construction time / Accident related risk. 13. ***The final section comes to the conclusion: The future of nuclear power is uncertain.*** * M. V. Ramana obtained his Ph.D. in Physics from Boston University in 1994 and was a post-doctoral fellow at the Department of Physics, University of Toronto and the Center for International Studies, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He came to Princeton in 1998. Between 2004 and 2009, he was at the Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies in Environment and Development in Bangalore, India. He is currently appointed jointly with SGS and the Nuclear Futures Laboratory and works on the future of nuclear energy in the context of climate change and nuclear disarmament. Ramana is the author of The Power of Promise: Examining Nuclear Energy in India. He is a member of the Science and Security Board of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists and the International Panel on Fissile Materials. [Source: <http://www.princeton.edu/sgs/faculty-staff/m.v.-ramana/>.] Sukla P.S.: For the trend in nuclear power generation globally, one may also look up: 'The rise and fall of nuclear power, in 6 charts' at <http://www.vox.com/2014/8/1/5958943/nuclear-power-rise-fall-six-charts>. -- Peace Is Doable -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
