Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote:

> I think you are suffering from the same lack of desire to educate yourself
> about nuclear power when you categorically reject nuclear power based on an
> incomplete education.
>

I am not rejecting it so much as reporting that the Japanese public, mass
media, and people living near reactors have rejected it. The people living
in towns near nuclear reactors insist that they remain shut down. The
central government must bow to their wishes.


The Japanese are smart people; they should not reject nuclear power based
> on the past mistakes and criminally deficient nuclear engineering of their
> American idols.
>

1. Perhaps they should not reject it but they have.

2. Americans are not their idols.

3. The problem in this case was Japanese site engineering (the placement of
the diesel engine fuel tanks), not the American reactor. As I pointed out
several times, any commercially available reactor would have failed under
these circumstances.



> Like China they should take their on fate in their own hands; they can
> devote some money and talent to direct their nuclear industry in the proper
> direction.
>

I think it would be more cost-effective to devote money and talent to
conventional alternative energy. I'm sure the Japanese could build offshore
wind turbines and rooftop solar at a far lower cost than nuclear energy. I
would not have said that before the Fukushima disaster revealed the true
dollar cost of nuclear energy.

The average wind turbine a few years ago cost ~$2 million per MW of
nameplate capacity. That's  $2000/kw, but actual capacity is about one
third of the nameplate so it $6000/kw. That is expensive, although it is
cheaper than a nuclear power plant starting cost per kilowatt. Anyway, for
the cost of this accident, ~$650 billion, you could buy about ~108 GW of
wind generating capacity, which is about half of Japan's installed
generator capacity, and far more than their nuclear capacity. Needless to
say, the cost of wind power is falling rapidly, and long before you build
108 GW the cost would fall by a large margin.

Even if it turns out the accident cost only half as much as people now
estimate, you could easily replace all of Japan's nuclear power with
offshore wind for the cost of this one accident. As I said to three more
accident like this would go a long way to bankrupting the nation. Nuclear
power is an economic sword of Damocles.

I do not think anyone in his right might would build more fission reactors
now that we have seen what they can do, and how impossible it is to clean
up. Any Japanese politician who recommended more reactors would be voted
out of office. That is not a problem in China where they do not have
democracy or elections and the government can get away with anything it
wants. The recent high speed train accident in turn illustrated this. The
literally buried the evidence on site. They buried the smashed railcars in
the ground. The public made a huge commotion so the government dug them up,
moved them to a local station and covered them up again with tarps this
time.

Given their track record on safety, pollution and other issues I do not
think you should hold the Chinese as a shining example to the world. The
government is, after all, a ruthless dictatorship.

- Jed

Reply via email to