This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Guest Post: Another Asian Fukushima Imminent?

Tyler Durden's picture




 

Submitted by John C.K. Daly from OilPrice.com,

 

Another Asian Fukushima Imminent?

 

Taiwan imports 99 percent of its energy, which is vital to its rapidly industrializing economy.

 

The island nation's electricity demand was recently growing at almost 5 percent per year, but this is slowing to about 3.3 percent per annum to 2013. Nuclear power has been a significant part of the electricity supply for two decades and now provides 17 percent of the country's overall energy needs.

 

But this has come at a potential cost. The country's three nuclear power plants (NPPs) comprise four General Electric boiling water reactors and two Westinghouse pressurized water reactors.

 

Taiwan launched its nuclear power project in 1972 with the construction of a General Electric boiling water reactor (BWR) at the Chinshan 1 Nuclear Plant in northern Taiwan. By 1985 Taiwan had a total of six reactors online at the Chinshan, Kuosheng and Maanshan NPPs, which provided nearly 20 percent of the island's power that fueled Taiwan's economic take off. The NPPs are operated by the Taiwan Power Co. (Taipower) utility under the Ministry of Economic Affairs.

 

In the wake of the 11 March Fukushima nuclear catastrophe in Japan, Professor Chan Chang-chuan of National Taiwan University's College of Public Health noted that Taiwan's three existing nuclear plants and a fourth, the one now under construction, are located in earthquake-prone regions near the sea, which originally facilitated the transportation of nuclear fuel and construction materials but leaves the sites facing the double hazards of earthquakes and tsunamis. Chan said, "Such locations expose our reactors to a double risk."

 

All six of Taiwan's existing reactors are built near major fault lines, and two more reactors are under construction at the advanced boiling water reactor (ABWR) Longmen NPP in New Taipei City's Gongliao District. On 31 October Taiwan's Minister of Economic Affairs Shih Yen-shiang said that the Longmen facility is expected to enter commercial operation no later than 2017.

 

Now the issue of the country's NPPs has entered the arena of the country's upcoming presidential elections, scheduled for 2012. All three of Taiwan's presidential candidates agree that the life of the country's three operational nuclear power plants should not be extended, but are divided on whether construction of the Longmen NPP should continue.

 

Capturing the high ground, on 3 November Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou unveiled the government's new nuclear energy policy, promising to gradually move the country towards a nuclear-free future, announcing that the scheduled 40-year service life of the Chinshan, Kuosheng and Maanshan nuclear plants would not be extended, while the New Taipei City Longmen NPP would only begin commercial operations when all necessary safety requirements were met. Ma said, "This new energy policy is crafted in a proactive, practical and responsible manner in keeping with the principles of no power rationing, maintenance of stable electricity prices and continued reduction of carbon dioxide emissions to meet international goals."

 

Going Ma one better, on 15 December Opposition Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairwoman candidate Tsai Ing-wen declared that if she wins next year she will close all three of Taiwan's existing nuclear power plants and mothball the Longmen NPP, seeking to end Taiwan's nuclear energy program by 2025 and candidate number three, James Soong of the People First Party, favors not extending the service life of the three existing NPPs but favors a 'wait and see' approach on the Longmen NPP. The Chinshan NPP license expires in 2018-2019, Kuosheng in 2021-2023 and Maanshan in 2024-2025.

 

The policy represents a significant turnaround in Taiwan's commitment to nuclear power, as in May 2009 Taipower was examining the prospects for six more reactors, starting with the Longmen NPP.

 

Therefore, the only remaining question is whether the South China Sea's notorious weather patterns will remain benign over the next 14 years. If not, according to Wang To-far, economics professor at National Taipei University, "if a level-seven nuclear crisis were to happen in Taiwan, it would destroy the nation."

 

Fingers crossed.

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:26 | 2019589 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

Wang To-Far....Long Duck Dong and Bang Dae Ho's cousin.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:33 | 2019608 cossack55
cossack55's picture

LMFAO

You are one sharp dog.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 15:14 | 2019948 mrgneiss
mrgneiss's picture

Am I missing something or what does weather have to do with tsunamis and earthquakes?  Or are they saying that if some kind of Fukushima event occurred in Taiwan the inevitable typhoon would smear the fallout all over the island, and do so 2-4 times per year?

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 15:42 | 2020070 trav7777
trav7777's picture

I got no clue, and neither do their candidates, who seem to think they can have power without having power plants.

So if they are going to BOTH reduce nuclear power AND cut CO2 emissions, where the fuck EXACTLY are they gonna get electricity from?

There is no fundamental problem with Mark 1 BWR that poses any great risk.  The problem with NPP is always the same- decades worth of cores are sitting uncontained in swimming pools.  This is true be they the latest CANDU or APWR, or the most ancient Mark 1 BWR.

Fukushima should have at least taught the necessity of H2 venting, and having shore power present within 6 hours of scram.  Either way, the catastrophe at Fukushima is from the SFPs, not the reactors.  Had those ponds been empty, this would have been a serious disaster but nowhere NEAR the scale it turned out to be.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 19:06 | 2020580 lincolnsteffens
lincolnsteffens's picture

Trav, I hate to agree with you, but, I do.

It seems that the more complex human lives become the more stupid they get. If Tiwan has an " anomalous incident of a rare and unusually a-typical complex unheard of coincidences ..blah, blah, blah"  there will be a deserted rock off the coast of the Peoples Republic of China that has had an Easter Island experience. Within a week of a blow up/earthquake nuclear disaster Taiwan would be 80% depopulated. The Red Chinese will welcome their brethren home to occupy new cities that have already been built but not used. The Chinese Nationalists will surrender what ever they need to in order to get fed and housed. No shots fired. Just a crises driven  emergency evacuation and eventually the manufacturing dynamo that was once Taiwan is transfered to the mainland.

I can see a welcomed Normandy type invasion by a Red Chinese flotilla of thousands of ships to hurriedly rescue the island's population from nuclear fall out. Mother Nature is not happy with human foolishness and is going to fix the problem by making life much simpler for humans to handle. Can you imagine trying to evacuate up to 23 Million people!

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 22:08 | 2020787 malek
malek's picture

> having shore power present within 6 hours of scram.

That's a step in the right direction, but doesn't help you much if the main power distibution rooms are flooded with seawater...

Sat, 12/31/2011 - 06:32 | 2023404 Element
Element's picture

There is no fundamental problem with Mark 1 BWR that poses any great risk.

 

Trav, Taiwan's regional geological setting is different to Japan's but it's almost equally prone to large earthquakes.

See figs 2, 3 and 4.

http://140.115.123.30/papers/Study%20on%20Probabilistic%20Seismic%20Haza...

That impressive fresh-looking central mountain belt is the result of regular large earthquakes. Note that figure2 is the product of a sample period that's far too short to show the scale and periodicity what made those mountains so impressive.

One day we'll find out what does that and I hope they're not still operating BWRs when that happens.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 16:21 | 2020202 Freddie
Freddie's picture

General Electric/Obama and Westinghouse make sh*t reactors built by union goons who vote Dem.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 23:36 | 2020954 ThrivingAdmistC...
ThrivingAdmistCollapse's picture

I thought Toshiba now runs Westing house?  In anycase, Taiwan is an integral part of the world economy at this point.  If Taiwan has a nuclear meltdown, such a small island society will not be able to cope with it.  Their downfall might trigger a broader East Asian economic collapse.

Fri, 12/30/2011 - 01:05 | 2021034 Reptil
Reptil's picture

Wait until the full reality of the Fukushima disaster dawns on the japanese people themselves.

We'll (sadly) see something new in the global economy. Open revolution in a "developed" country.

People have started getting sick and dying already, it has begun. Until now the cultural code in Japan has held this process of open revolt within check.

This is just one example, the authorities have now resorted to suppression of the citizens, they must be very afraid.
"I've heard that the excrement from the irradiated evacuees like yourselves contaminates the environment more with radiation". Mayor of Tomakomai City

Or import (expensive) Panda bears?
"Sendai City in Miyagi Prefecture wants to "borrow" pandas from China to cheer children in the city. So the vice mayor of Sendai visited PM Noda on December 22 with two TV celebrities to press Noda to ask for panda loan when he visits China on December 25. Sure, says Noda.

The celebrities, Masahiko Kondo and Tetsuko Kuroyanagi, vow they will support the city by providing money for panda housing and protection, which is estimated to be 1 billion yen over 5 years. Kondo says the money comes from donations that his office has collected from citizens for the people in disaster-affected areas. (Yomiuri Shinbun Miyagi local version 12/23/2011)"

Panda bears are a good replacement for Lady Gaga? To calm the restless natives? Aaaah but it is obvious; A cute bear, on the extinction list, comforting cute japanese children who have no hope of ever producing healthy offspring themselves.

The inverted totalitarian state is showing deep cracks.

Radiation affects intelligence. How would citizens react, if they'd know? In both the USA and Japan, the effects are known, can be known.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Jo1Kqez3fUU

So... there are more problems because of .... more awareness??!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDHS6Ddn4ow

In Japan and in Belarus they call that "harmful rumours".
And no, a fair number of USA plants are EXACTLY the same as Fukushima Dai-ichi. The new AP-1000 is not safe at all, no "lessons from Fukushima" have been implemented. They just going to build the plants, reason be damned! http://fairewinds.com/content/ap-1000-press-conference-%E2%80%93-technic...

Why? Here's why: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/11/21/2795537/warren-buffett-visit...

Cognitive dissonance at it's finest.

Fri, 12/30/2011 - 00:25 | 2021010 Reptil
Reptil's picture

General Electric (and the whole nuclear industry): cesspool

Whistleblower Jack Shannon: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yf1ur9aBiS8

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:39 | 2019628 Tsar Pointless
Tsar Pointless's picture

You forgot his brother, Wang To-Suck.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 17:18 | 2020382 Steaming_Wookie_Doo
Steaming_Wookie_Doo's picture

If his Wang To-far, then I hope the wife's Pu See Wei-deep

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 14:08 | 2019747 earleflorida
earleflorida's picture

"Dr Stu's Blog" 3/24/11___Stuwart Farrimond

'The Future of Nuclear Power after Fukushima': Thorium Reactors *{LFTR-Reactors'}

http://www.realdoctorstu.com/2011/03/24/the-future-of-nuclear-power-afte...

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 15:37 | 2020059 Matt
Matt's picture

I like how people express how safe, efficient and non-waste producing these LFTRs are. Especially considering they are hypothetical.

What I want to see is for a bunch of them to be built in a desert somewhere, and then tested to higher standards than we test cars. smash stuff into them, flood them, bomb them. Let one run for 50 years, and see what happens at the end of its life.

I mean, Fukushima reactos were within 3 years of being decommisioned; if they were brand new, they wouldnt have overfilled spent fuel ponds and likely wouldn't have been so problematic.

Forget how awesome it is hypothetically. I want to see real-world worst case scenarios and know the true risks and costs from planning through operation to complete decommissioning and disposal of all waste before we deploy them all over the world in large numbers.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 15:46 | 2020084 trav7777
trav7777's picture

I want you people to sit back and contemplate how MINOR Fukushima would have been had it NOT been for the 50 years' worth of spent core material sitting in uncontained swimming pools.

Even Gundersen maintains that the big boom was caused by a prompt criticality in a SFP. 

The problem with NP is NOT the reactor design...although the Mark 1 has some definite safety flaws, these were not what the great risk was.  If you decomission a BWR, STILL wtf do you do with the spent fuel!?!?

Fukushima in the event of coolant loss has the same issues with hydrogen and explosions and release of core materials because they'd STILL have been in those pools.  If Japan built a brand-new APWR on the site, they would STILL HAVE the SAME issues with spent fuel to deal with (although some of the newer reactor designs can partially reprocess and burn this stuff)

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 16:34 | 2020235 Fukushima Sam
Fukushima Sam's picture

Dude, Fukushima (sans pools) is still playing out.  They don't know where the corium is, but they do know they have contaminated groundwater.

Imagine a solar storm taking out everything electrical in the US or even the globe.  Including the NPP control systems...

Without immediate cold shutdown capability nuclear power is a huge bet against nature.  And on a long enough timeline...

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 22:11 | 2020793 trav7777
trav7777's picture

Newer designs have passive safety features.

if there is such a solar storm FAR MORE people will die as planes fall out of the sky than from nuclear material

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 17:11 | 2020366 Matt
Matt's picture

Did you even read my post before replying to it? I specifically said: "I mean, Fukushima reactos were within 3 years of being decommisioned; if they were brand new, they wouldnt have overfilled spent fuel ponds and likely wouldn't have been so problematic." I already considered how much less of a problem there would have been.

When the BWRs were originally designed, they were made to have a certain amount of fuel in the Spent Fuel Ponds. Over time, the amount of material and the density of storage was increased multiple times, since they never came up with a long term solution.

Who knows what challenges there would be after 40+ years of operating a Thorium reactor? who knows what modifications to procedures and regulations will be implemented to cut costs, or "solve" waste storage problems? The only way to know would be to run one for real through its whole life, prior to deploying them all over the world, in case they somehow create some as-yet-unforseen problem worse than the SFP problem we currently have.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 22:15 | 2020801 trav7777
trav7777's picture

of course I read your post, don't assume that I am specifically replying to you as opposed to the theme in general.

Without a solution to the waste problem, no NPPs can be built, until we get magic Gen 4 that can burn waste and generates stuff only radioactive for a few hundred years lol

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 22:11 | 2020790 malek
malek's picture

So you're saying the complete meltdowns of several reactor cores were/are not a real problem?

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 22:13 | 2020796 trav7777
trav7777's picture

no; they really weren't a big deal compared to the other issues.

Meltdowns are just when core materials melt. 

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 15:57 | 2020125 LowProfile
LowProfile's picture

Hypothetical my ass.  They had one running for five years, and I for one don't want to wait until after I'm dead to adopt thorium power.

Your comments smack of someone woefully uniformed about thorium power.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 17:16 | 2020371 Matt
Matt's picture

You comment smacks of someone who only cares about short term gain, without considering any long term implications. It's thinking like yours that got us into this whole problem of overfilled Spent Fuel Ponds to begin with. Why worry about waste disposal now? I want my cheap electricity NOW, and someone else later on can figure out where to dispose of the waste.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 22:51 | 2020866 Errol
Errol's picture

Matt +1

I think it's very possible that between the three E's (Economy, Energy, Environment), humanity will not have the money/resources to properly decommission most of the plants now in operation.  I personally believe that peak cheap oil, peak debt, and overpopulation will result in the unravelling of industrial civilization, leaving these radioactive buildings' pipes, wiring, etc to be scrapped in the future by people who have no idea what the plant's original purpose was.

Dmitry Orlov has proposed a competition to design statues that are both very enduring and will properly convey to illiterate people the horrors that await them if they try to salvage materials from these sites.  God help them if this doesn't happen.

Fri, 12/30/2011 - 09:57 | 2021356 Chump
Chump's picture

Are you actually saying that we don't know how to store the waste??  I swear, you dumb anti-nuclear cunts lobby left and right to cut off any and all waste disposal options and then use waste disposal problems as a reason to continue being anti-nuclear.  Go die in a fire!

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 14:33 | 2019818 CORNGUY
CORNGUY's picture

Outstanding SheepDog

Outstanding

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 16:08 | 2020162 AchtungAffen
AchtungAffen's picture

Yuu Arafuka, just shut up.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:26 | 2019592 gmrpeabody
gmrpeabody's picture

Shake and bake bitchez...

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:28 | 2019595 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

But.....but......but I thought they figured out what went wrong in Japan and fixed it. No more Earthquakes by order of the www.BIS.org.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:51 | 2019674 LeBalance
LeBalance's picture

many many more 9.0 Earthquakes to come courteousy of Nuclear Fallout (thank you 2000 plus nuclear tests and other PLANNED releases!) changing the absorption albedo of the ICE it landed on Leading to Melting Ice (40 Trillion Tons per year in Greenland alone) Leading to Isostatic Depression of the Ocean floors Leading to Changes in Ocean Current (Big time Climatic Change: Ice Ages Etc), Continental Plate Movement to Compensate, ETC!

Watch some believersunderground (YT). He looks like a jesus goof until you check out his references.  (lol).

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:30 | 2019602 redytogo
redytogo's picture

Radiation is good for you, just ask, anyone within a 20 mile radius of Fukushima...

 

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 14:05 | 2019731 Non Passaran
Non Passaran's picture

What's that supposed to mean?

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 14:21 | 2019789 Reptil
Reptil's picture

The problem is way way WAY beyond Fukushima's 20 miles, or even Japan.
You all need to watch this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwYDPUszF4s

o__o

Fri, 12/30/2011 - 00:35 | 2021021 FeralSerf
FeralSerf's picture

If this is true, and it seems likely, how much worse is it in Japan?  Millions?

http://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/U.S.-Fukushima-Medi...

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:31 | 2019605 ACP
ACP's picture

Ha! It's probably happen 6 times in China already and we just don't know about it.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:33 | 2019609 taniquetil
taniquetil's picture

Irrefutable Politician Logic:

"We should move of nuclear power for the security of our country"

Imports 99% of its energy, most of it from China.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:34 | 2019613 sabra1
sabra1's picture

it's no accident that reactors are built on fault lines! it's no accident radioactive  safety limits have been raised, and deemed safe!

check out 1:50 min. into the video!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLFB4C5FCF0D8CE1A1&feature=player_detailpage&v=yIfU41BICf4

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:39 | 2019630 fuu
fuu's picture

Check out how many reactors are located on important rivers and lakes in the US.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 15:47 | 2020088 trav7777
trav7777's picture

JFC I hope you were being sarcastic here; if not, you are an idiot.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 16:28 | 2020222 fuu
fuu's picture

Are you denying that reactors in the US are located on rivers and lakes?

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 16:44 | 2020283 StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

Whoosh!   Right over yer haid!  Think for a sec:  Something hot that's cooled by water -- WHERE do you place it?

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 16:59 | 2020330 fuu
fuu's picture

No way captain.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:35 | 2019617 wolfy747400
wolfy747400's picture

Nice to know...But will that change anything? No. In relation to Nuclear what is the best way forward? Thorium. The reason we don't want to change IMO is the shit it used in bombs. Easy to get your hands on if it's everywhere. But I could be wong.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:42 | 2019636 Schmuck Raker
Schmuck Raker's picture

Ron Paul/Thorium 2012!

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:35 | 2019619 vegas
vegas's picture

I'm canceling my timeshare condo in Taiwan.

 

http://vegasxau.blogspot.com

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:39 | 2019629 Harrison
Harrison's picture

Yet another kneejerk overreaction to a one-time catastrophe. If Taiwan really does shut down its nuclear power plants, the island's economy will collapse. Taiwan's economy has already been hollowed out from moving manufacturing (and jobs) over to mainland China; Taiwan simply cannot afford to import enough oil and natural gas to make up the balance, and as we've seen in Spain, "green energy" is a fraud.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:40 | 2019633 fuu
fuu's picture

"Yet another kneejerk overreaction to a one-time catastrophe"

lol

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:45 | 2019652 Ancona
Ancona's picture

"Knee jerk overreaction"???

Perhaps you should go and live in Fukushima dumbass.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 15:48 | 2020093 trav7777
trav7777's picture

Fukushima was preventable.

Perhaps you should go and live in the DARK, bitch

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:54 | 2019683 Chump
Chump's picture

Agreed.  This is fear-mongering idiocy of the type ZH regularly denounces when it's, for example, coming from the U.S. concerning Iran.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 18:21 | 2020342 Reptil
Reptil's picture

FACTUALLY INCORRECT
the nuclear industry has been covering up all kinds of accidents.

moreover they've covered up the MEASURABLE negative influence on people living near or under the smoke of nuclear reactors.

WATCH THIS

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Uxz-x7Oifs

THEY LIE, HAVE ALWAYS LIED, AND AT BEST ARE TOTALLY INCAPABLE OF RUNNING THIS KIND OF INDUSTRY.

http://enenews.com/bloomberg-exposes-conflicted-iaea-safety-division-is-...

(also read the comments of the above link)

The japanese didn't even know how to operate their own plant in case of an emergency. !!!!!!!!! @__@
at 1:29 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOyfeGxmkDI
It WAS built on a KNOWN fault line (so the radioactive water can now spread and contaminate massive areas of ground water). Great.

http://babelfish.yahoo.com/translate_url?doit=done&tt=url&intl=1&fr=bf-h...

Nuclear fission was always subsedised by governments. It can not be competitive with alternative energy sources. (Solar foremost) These are now CHEAPER than nuclear fission.
Thorium is cumbersome, it requires a high tech plant, run by capable people, since it's not as easy to do as people say.

Solar panel producing plants in the USA have gone bankrupt. That is because there was corruption, and mismanagement (as was thouroughly covered here on ZH). In other parts of the world this technology is booming. They made a descision for the american people, and marketing and a media blackout is used to cover up the fact that it was the WRONG descision.
The whole artificial nuclear "renaissance" is over, and it should be. http://timesfreepress.com/news/2011/dec/29/1229-a1-experts-nuclear-initi...

SO PLEASE STOP POSTING LIES. FISSION NUCLEAR ISN'T "TOUGH", IT'S STUPID. IT'S NOT POLITICAL, OR GOOD FOR THE USA, IT'S STOOOOPiIIDD
IT'S THE LOSING STRATEGY.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 18:53 | 2020562 IrritableBowels
IrritableBowels's picture

Smoke?! LOL

Fri, 12/30/2011 - 01:10 | 2021042 Reptil
Reptil's picture

yes, I need a smoke. thank you.  hmm

Fri, 12/30/2011 - 00:41 | 2021024 FeralSerf
FeralSerf's picture

Nonsense -- they can convert the capacity to NG fueled plants. The cost isn't that much greater, especially if they include the nuclear waste disposal costs of the nukes.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:42 | 2019638 Benjamin Glutton
Benjamin Glutton's picture

OT...but hilarious.

 

World Criminal Court Released it's Annual "WAR CRIMINALS STILL AT LARGE" Top 10...

1.Omar al-Bashir, Sudan
2.Joseph Kony, Uganda
3.Bosco Ntaganda, Congo
4.Mengistu Haile Mariam, Ethiopia
5.Kaing Guek Eav ('Duch'), Cambodia
6.George W. Bush, USA
7.Dr Aribert Heim, Na_zi Germany
8.Richard Cheney, USA
9.Jean-Pierre Bemba, Congo
10.Donald Rumsfeld, USA

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 14:00 | 2019706 francis_sawyer
francis_sawyer's picture

Where's Barry?

Could he be the first 'peace prize' recipient to make this top 10 list?

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 14:02 | 2019717 Benjamin Glutton
Benjamin Glutton's picture

that too would be hilarious...and sad.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 14:02 | 2019718 lolmao500
lolmao500's picture

Where is Kissinger?

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:43 | 2019640 jimmyjames
jimmyjames's picture

Nuclear is fast becoming the most hated energy source on the market-

Uranium miners look to be putting in a bottom-

When everyone hates something-its generally a buy signal-

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:43 | 2019643 Long-John-Silver
Long-John-Silver's picture

I'm sure a couple of wind turbines and a bank of solar panels will easily replace those nuclear plants. /SARC

What are they going to replace them with? The ONLY viable option are coal fired power plants and a constant supply of coal brought in by dry bulk freighters. Even then it's going to be problematic due to the envirowhacks efforts to end all coal mining. I'm too old to watch this show unfold over the next 15 or so years.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:43 | 2019644 Hmm...
Hmm...'s picture

silly article.  Another reactor meltdown IMMINENT?  Hardly.

Fukushima Daiichi was there for about 40 years before it had its accident.  There were many earthquakes in Japan over that time period.

Clearly nuclear power comes with high potential risks.  but I think it silly in the extreme to declare that a Korean accident is imminent due to one accident over 40 years in Japan.

Is there an IMMINENT flooding of Manhattan since Katrina flooded New Orleans recently... and both Manhattan and New Orleans are in Hurricaine pathways?

 

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 15:58 | 2020087 earleflorida
earleflorida's picture

what makes you think that 'hurricane alley' hasn't already changed its trajectory path,... with 2012 and beyond following the eastern atlantic shore-line into the heart of the north-east

nyc was saved this time - but, if i'm right, and this pattern change becomes routine,... there are a great many nukes in its [their] pathway, on the edge to be, 'quite', overly concerned & cautious about -

never say never,... 

PS. as for quoting Faber on predictions --- "Just don't say when the change occurs,... only that there will be a change [tops/bottoms?] a comin ---  but, living in florida, i can personally tell ya that the weather has changed dramatically over the last three years

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 19:52 | 2020645 Matt
Matt's picture

I thought we were talking about Taiwan, where did you come up with Korea? What am I missing?

Fri, 12/30/2011 - 01:14 | 2021046 Reptil
Reptil's picture

I'll bet you ONE ounce of gold, that within the next 5 years there's going to be another major nuclear accident, if this train keeps on moving as it has.

We'll either be rich, or zombies with our collective dicks fallen off from the Ceasium. (or both)

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:51 | 2019670 Börjesson
Börjesson's picture

Taiwan imports 99 percent of its energy, and yet nuclear power provides 17 percent of the country's overall energy needs...

Are you saying that they import nuclear energy? If so, why is it relevant what the source of the imported energy is?

Clearly, if three nuclear plants put together produce less than one percent of their energy, then Taiwan needs to look at either the efficency of their nuclear plants, or their overall energy consumption (or both).

Fri, 12/30/2011 - 00:51 | 2021031 FeralSerf
FeralSerf's picture

Taiwan also imports its nuclear energy in the form of uranium.  It isn't relevant.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:54 | 2019681 silverserfer
silverserfer's picture

most dishonarable meltdown.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 18:59 | 2020571 IrritableBowels
IrritableBowels's picture

I guess it was time to clean my screen, anyhow.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:56 | 2019698 MoonshineDelight
MoonshineDelight's picture

So how many folks have dropped dead from radiation poisoning in Japan? Zero? How large was the spike in birth defects over the last 9 months? There wasn't one?  More people die falling off of windmills than at level 7 nuclear events.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:59 | 2019704 djsmps
djsmps's picture

Be patient, my friend.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 16:02 | 2020144 earleflorida
earleflorida's picture

absolutely brilliant,... uber excellente!!!

perhaps this kind of intellectual discourse was the reason for belonging?

Fri, 12/30/2011 - 00:55 | 2021032 FeralSerf
FeralSerf's picture

There was likely many more than zero that have died.  The MSM doesn't do a very thorough job of reporting them though and it's not likely to do so in the forseeable future.

http://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/U.S.-Fukushima-Medi...

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 13:58 | 2019703 francis_sawyer
francis_sawyer's picture

All your godzillas are belong to us...

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 14:00 | 2019705 Jim in MN
Jim in MN's picture

Energy is in general a bad news business.  Good for Taiwan to consider their options carefully.  But islands don't have very good options with current technologies.

As for the headline--let me see your earthquake predictor, it must be really awesome.  Please do warn the people who would be directly hurt or killed by any disaster big enough to take down the reactors.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 14:07 | 2019746 mholzman
mholzman's picture

 

How do these environmental freaks fit into a financial analysis site?

Where is the free lunch in any energy source?

Is it okay to destroy the migratory paths of birds and butterflies with windmills?

How many insects will go extinct with miles of solar panels?

Do you love the smell of coal dust?

Do you think base-load power is insignificant?

Michael Crichton was right on the money in his book, State of Fear:  the environmental groups are heavily financed attorneys with friends in the Middle East.

The number one cause of death and disability on this planet within a decade will be the automobile. Hey, but where's the sci-fi in that?

 

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 16:06 | 2020155 earleflorida
earleflorida's picture

another absolutely brilliant response,... fabulous!!!

don't get any better?

 

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 18:10 | 2020446 Reptil
Reptil's picture

more migratory birds and insects die in the HUGE drainage pools filled with radioactive acid, that were formed as byproduct to uranium mining. moreover groundwater bassins that stretch out over hundreds of miles are now being polluted with a steady stream of radioactive leakage from the effects of raw uranium mining and processing. (the western aquifer in Australia) http://world-nuclear.org/info/inf25.html

Effects won't be noticable the first decade or so, but after that, it's logical to see a decline in life, since uranium latches on DNA and fucks it up FORGOOD. DAMAGE IS HEREDITARY AND WILL BE COVERED OVER TO FUTURE GENERATIONS.

In Siberia, another "unspoiled" wasteland, we send our used up nuclear fuel, our radiating uranium and plutonium. it's just sitting there, waiting for the buildings and sheet covering to crumble, and then fuck up HUGE stretches of land.

So, how does this compare to Solar or Wind?

yeah there's a free lunch. it'll actually stimulate small to medium business all over the world, as it's essentially decentralised. solar, wind all kinds of new technology is sprouting up everywhere. to state we're forever dependent on a few technologies that existed at some point in time 40 years ago, is doing gross disservice to the inginuity of man. Moreover, the cheap and cheerful fossile fuel is used up on frivolous wars and other idiocy. While human beings should use it to propel us forward in a new phase of energy independence. which also will mean FREEDOM to do other things.

Yeah it's possible it's free and it's impossible to control centrally. and that's EXACTLY the reason it's not happening right now.
think I'm fantasising? think again! http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-29/utilities-giving-away-power-as-...

THE PROBLEM IS NOT THE TECHNOLOGY AVAILABLE, OR THE RESOURCES, IT'S OUR LEADERSHIP THAT'S FAILING MISERABLY.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 15:22 | 2019811 THE DORK OF CORK
THE DORK OF CORK's picture

Americans are Spolit - most countries simply have no choice in the matter.

 No coal , no Hydro - means you must split atoms.

NG for electricity generation is a epic waste of a precious resourse even if you have a surplus for a moment in time.

Waste means more people die of poverty.

If nuclear was easy it would have been done on a larger scale already.

 

www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5dCJmZmYCc

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 15:35 | 2020049 Goldilocks
Goldilocks's picture

(they have closed the loop on nuclear waste… it doesn’t have to be dirty)
Regardless of how good or bad nuclear is,
It has been set up as a poster child for failure.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 15:52 | 2020107 trav7777
trav7777's picture

yes, some of the most recent reactor designs are proliferation-proof and can consume spent fuel to reduce its toxicity.

Nobody is building them due to immense capital cost and there's STILL NOWHERE to put any spent rods or any waste of any kind.

The PROMISE going in was that this waste situation would be sorted out.  As it HASN'T been, no real new development can be done.  Even a decom...where do you send the radioactive parts?

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 16:26 | 2020216 jimmyjames
jimmyjames's picture

Nobody is building them due to immense capital cost and there's STILL NOWHERE to put any spent rods or any waste of any kind.

*************

Over 60 power reactors are currently being constructed in 14 countries plus Taiwan (see Table below), notably China, South Korea and Russia.

The International Atomic Energy Agency in its 2010 report significantly increased its projection of world nuclear generating capacity. It anticipated at least 73 GWe in net new capacity by 2020, and then 546 to 803 GWe in place in 2030 – much more than projected previously, and 45% to 113% more than 377 GWe actually operating at the end of 2010. OECD estimates range up to 816 GWe in 2030. The change was based on specific plans and actions in a number of countries, including China, India, Russia, Finland and France, coupled with the changed outlook due to constraints on carbon emissions.

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf17.html

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 17:57 | 2020459 youLilQuantFuker
youLilQuantFuker's picture

The reality is that Fukushima was no accident. When there economy goes down, the whole island is going to be used for waste storage. It's already being discussed inside the industry at industry events like: http://www.radwastesummit.com

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 22:25 | 2020818 trav7777
trav7777's picture

ok, I should have caveated, nobody in the WEST.  Yes, Areva is standing up some capacity in their modern gen 3, EPR or something.

However, on the flipside, even in Taiwan you see there are people seriously talking about shelving ALL NPPs without any alternative.  Germany did the same thing.

It's ridiculous.  The US depends upon reactors built ALL in excess of 30 years ago, for 20% of electricity or thereabouts.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 16:46 | 2020230 THE DORK OF CORK
THE DORK OF CORK's picture

The Irish spent nearly 100 billion in fixed capital investment during 2005 & 2006.

However we choose to build Houses & roads which was a bit of a mistake..............

We only need 2 Sizewell B size reactors for our base load !

 At the very most thats 10 to 15 billion spread over a 10 year construction phase !

The west simply spends too much on consumer durables which we pretend is capital - its just a question of defective resourse allocation.

And to think we could have gone out in a blaze of glory with a Tricolour planted on the Ocean of Storms !!!!

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nfz9O_mSY1U

A large nuclear programme however does have the benefit of Diverting NG to its most valuable use - direct combustion , rather then wasting the stuff on Transformation losses.

Economists claim to not understand Opportunity costs - only concentrating on the direct costs of a Nuclear programme - the loss of gas to more useful combustion seems to be lost on them.

Fri, 12/30/2011 - 00:25 | 2021009 Freddie
Freddie's picture

The Irish politicians chose to send a lot of Irish taxpayer money to Africa cause that tax cheat Bono Hewison told them to do it.  That fkkking Bono also pushed Ireland into the Euro.

F Bono and U2.

 

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 17:00 | 2020335 non_anon
non_anon's picture

meh, just go back to good ol' emmanuel labor

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 14:49 | 2019872 youLilQuantFuker
youLilQuantFuker's picture

I luv it when the ZHews rank on the Asians. Good times, great banter.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 16:12 | 2020172 ThisIsBob
ThisIsBob's picture

Can we not sell them coal?  China is downwind and will never frucking notice it.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 16:59 | 2020332 non_anon
non_anon's picture

ha ha, the asian tigers run together

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 17:22 | 2020389 Zymurguy
Zymurguy's picture

No more yankie my wankie, my Wang To Sor

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 19:50 | 2020644 non_anon
non_anon's picture

ha ha, wanker!

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 17:23 | 2020393 merchantratereview
merchantratereview's picture

30 years to cleanup an accident is not exactly "too cheap to meter".

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 21:13 | 2020743 creviceCaress
creviceCaress's picture

hey pro-nuke ass-VEE-pays.....nukes are like our paradigm's ongoing Darwin Award.  there's lotsa yankme arguments whateva.......how about trying this one on for size...since we ALL gonna be wearing the same suit;  do with less/ do without.

this camelfukery is unbelievable....its like a big joke and i just keep waiting.....waiting ....waiting for the punchline

 

Maybe aliens will agree to tractor-beam all NPPs away in exchange for raw food?....say any/all people who have ever though of, or are presently politicians.....?

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 21:59 | 2020780 knowless
knowless's picture

If humans want to use nuclear power(continue the current iteration of civilization) then they should devise ways to utilize the "waste" from these processes. It's the same as petroleum, eventually we will break all the bonds of all available nuclear fuel, and then where the fuck will we be? if we aren't colonizing at least the fucking moon by then, then a new branch of physics better fucking have found a new power source. can we break free from constantly relying on naturally destructive power sources, without ever building the infrastructure to delay power loss through harnessing emissions, or creating base grids which rely on low level constant power(solar?).

 

I don't even get it. harness natural elements to use as base power source, use depleteable sources of power to continue expansion of extraterrestrial exploration and homeworld infrastructure growth, fund science to advance the previous points.

 

if you want civilization to exist then do something about it. otherwise, who gives a shit, I'm down with living in caves personally, but I would like it if the people running the fucking show would have a little concern for the future, if you're running a nuclear power plant, then you better be investing in updating your technology, if you aren't, then seriously, wtf, why are humans still even alive? it's fucking ludicrous. if you fuckers are managing the economy, then at least GET IT FUCKING DONE.

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 22:26 | 2020822 trav7777
trav7777's picture

there aren't any real non-depletable power sources on the scale our expansion has required

Thu, 12/29/2011 - 23:18 | 2020920 knowless
knowless's picture

physics yielding new understandings of matter.

robotics creating new options for colonization/exploration.

 

without that, a new dark ages, animalistic tendencies in power.

one step forward, two steps back.

 

if the herd is culled than so be it.

 

but without creating what is necessary to maintain the infrastructure to create the technologies necessary for the expansion which would facilitate the continuation of our species...

 

death will reign, or none will remember it.

 

attempting to provide a compassionate suffix will only illiterate the uselessness of my comments. what I would like: expendable energy used to create the world for those that live going forward, instead of wasting it to maintain a structure which is bound to fail.

 

I understand, we must limit our expansion. how that's done though, must reflect the best elements of our species, without regard to past prejudice.

Fri, 12/30/2011 - 22:28 | 2023104 honestann
honestann's picture

Yes, humans must limit their expansion...

... OR...

Move into space.  In fact, mankind BADLY needs to expand into outer space.  Space is BIG... way too big to comprehend unless you've grappled for years to understand the volume of the solar system (just for starters).

Few humans have any idea how utterly crucial moving into outer space is for the species.  Mankind simply cannot function without a frontier to expand into.  Without such a frontier, the dynamics of mankind do not work.  The most crucial reason we need a frontier is... individual liberty - and all the creativity and progress that depends upon individual liberty.  Without individual liberty, humans will be purposely destroyed by the predators-that-be and predator-class.  Even absent that, humanity would self-destruct without a frontier to expand into.

Central planning is utterly, totally, completely counter-productive.  People who would otherwise dream, create and produce wonderous new things don't bother.  The challenge to invent and produce amazing new technologies and products is overwhelming enough when people are free that few bother to take the risks.  When central planning is the modus-operandi, almost nobody will take the required risks when they know their efforts will almost certainly be obstructed, thwarted, destroyed and punished by the predators-that-be and predator-class who enslave and control via the status-quo.

Humans are spiraling down the toilet with NO WAY to stop the flush... except for a return to individual liberty or the escape valve of a frontier like the human development and habitation of outer space.

Human beings, RIP.

Sat, 12/31/2011 - 07:18 | 2023423 Element
Element's picture

I got an idea ... given leaving for space next Tuesday on a stray alien space freighter is a bit of a long shot.

How's about in the meantime we dredge out the South Pacific basin to about another 4-km deeper and place all the grunge on top of where Fukushima is and thus create a far larger, "Japanese Co-Prosperity sphere", and a land-bridge to Disneyland in Cali.

Then we just use all the BWR spent fuel rods to melt the antarctic ice sheet so the water run-off fills in the 4-km deep hole in the South Pacific basin! ... see where I'm going with this? .... and not any sea level rise rsults! ... we're good for .... iDunno ... 40 years maybe ... at least!

And still time enough for some benevolent aliens to show up.

Sun, 01/01/2012 - 00:04 | 2024303 honestann
honestann's picture

Actually, you make some good points, engineering wise.

Sure, they're not entirely fleshed out, and are half in jest.  But only half, which demonstrates how conventional, close-minded and non-creative is the predator-controlled, predator-dominated world of today.

If the predators weren't in total control, I'd focus more on projects located on earth.  But the fact is, the predators are so utterly and completely in control, they would thwart, pervert and destroy any and every attempt to do something smart.  They are problem-causers and destroyers, not creators and producers.

Fri, 12/30/2011 - 06:12 | 2021169 HungrySeagull
HungrySeagull's picture

During TMI's 4 days... we essentially waited to see if we would have to flee a region that will be uninhabitable for 10 thousand years should the system fail.

Everyone was all over it. It would only be years later we will learn from books and such just how close it was.'

I grow increasingly angry because PEOPLE know about everything these reactors are, engineering, storage, cooling, power, local geology etc etc etc. But all pretend to do drills from time to time that really does not convey the OH SHIT feeling which should also involve the local population.

I like nuclear power. Our US Navy does it well. I would not want to see what would happen when a nuclear ship is gutted in battle and is burning with a scrammed reactor or reactors. From what I understand the Navy is taking it a step further and is seeking out a very high technological learning to apply electric to the ships and drive em without the nuclear or oil.

 

For years I endured the loud crying from People that our fixed number of nuclear facilities are being stuffed and overrun with storage caskets while Yucca mountain was being fought in Congress and in Nevada. Apparently no one wants to bury the nuclear waste there or anywhere.

 

Ya know? Put the spent fuel onto rocket and SHIP THE GODDAMN THING into the SUN. Use the Sun as a garbage can for the crap we have here on earth that is polluting the shit.

 

I mean, goddamn am I the only idiot on this Board or anywhere that imagines a steady stream of caskets containing bad fuel rods, spent nuclear fuel and other really dangerous things that can hurt people. Ship it all to the sun. Just fuck it, get the old Can Do attitude and get it done.

 

Yes I am encourage by the Nations here and there shutting down the plants and making them totally cold while there is time. They can then carefully consider the next step.

While they are doing that, we are seeing Natural Gas being burned to generate electricity. From what I was taught, Baltimore Gas and Electric had "Peakers" in places like Notchcliff that will kick in and generate a great deal of power for a sweltering Baltimore and surrounding areas to keep the grid stable. It is a good use for gas but not for 24/7 generting.

I point you to the technology that was made some time ago where apparently a strong pipe is put under ground with wire. It is then chilled so that it will take very little to ship very large amounts of electricity. At the time I was remember when a Winter storm destroyed the VERY large transmission towers to Ontario or Quebec I cannot remember. But the images of crushed towers and all that cable stretching for miles in the brutal ice while millions froze for having no power was a very bad time.

 

Why have we not replaced the above ground transmission systems for long haul with the new super cold pipes to ship power safely and possibly cheaply and boost our total Mega watt overhead as well.

 

We sit on coal. Yes they are crying to retire the coal. Fuck that. Just start running rail to the old coal mines and haul them to new plants to burn juice.

A long time ago every little town had a Carberatted gas/oil works that produced either illumination gas, cooking gas or a combination of both among other things. This technology simply used coal in a closed retort to roast until it broke down into a substance called Coke and gases were captured and processed to the holding tanks.

We don't see that anymore.

However we can use Magnetic induction using strong loops of metal to create heat quickly to cook whatever it is we need to cook to extract the necessary power.

We have such riches in solar, geothermal and wind. I know that there are folks who are doing what they can. I myself would love to have solar or some wind with geo to run my home. I only need about 300 kilowatts per month, about 22 per day max. However do I have the thousands of dollars to install such a system?

No I don't and I blame myself looking back on a life time hauling freight with plenty of time to think about what I  would like to do when it was time to stop trucking.

 

Sometimes I have these thoughts and they are depressing because I am just one home owner who has to constantly maintain a generator and it's fuel supply because of the typical weather, solar storms and other issues that disrupt power from time to time in my area.

 

I did however do my part by replacing obselete stuff in the house with good low power items and enjoy the benefits of a electric bill that is just about 40 bucks a month average year round no matter what I do.

 

I am sick of apathy in this Nation and other Nations with the ongoing disaster with Japan. Things are getting really bad and no one seems to give a shit except for a few very educational internet blog written by people within japan or has escape japan knowing that Tepco and the government has failed them.

 

It is possible that Japan is being viewed as a gigantic model experiment as to what happens during a prolonged nuclear failure with a eye towards killing off the weak, sick, old and those too stupid to understand what they need to do to survive and live well.

 

I can continue to write, however I think enough has been said tonight. When I think about the Volt, US Financial waste re solar power and so forth and so on we are a broken Nation, a dysfunctional society.

I love America, but really hate to see what it has become. Maybe I am idealistic and dreamy but I am getting too old and short tempered to put up with anything that drains time, energy and saps the strength of our Nation and it's people.

 

One thing is clear. Power is life in today';s world. I still recall Colonial Williamsburg and other places that did not have electricity for hundreds of years and did just well.

 

I could easily adapt to such a life style again, however there are some things just too easily accessible to us with power such as shared knowledge, opionions and what have you online.

Fri, 12/30/2011 - 22:41 | 2023116 honestann
honestann's picture

ALL the significant problems are solvable.  However, they will not be solved because governments are captured and controlled by large corporations, and only large corporations build nuclear power plants.  Thus reactor complexes of the most insanely unsafe configurations will continue to be build in the most insanely unsafe places.

It is quite sad to know that nuclear power can be perfectly safe, viable and benevolent (if engineered, located and priced honestly), but in practice are utterly irresponsible due to the dominance of huge corporations and their co-conspirators in huge government.

An average 8 year old given the basic facts about nuclear power and geology (earthquake and tsunami dangers) would immediately rule out building nuclear power plants where they are located.  No honest engineer on earth would locate these power plants where they are located (and their crazy design configurations), which means, only dishonest engineers are allowed to participate in their design and execution.  This field is 100% lies, politics and corporate criminality and 0% honesty and engineering.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!