Tag Archives: nuclear

Radiation Dose Chart

The Japanese earthquake, tsunami which have been followed by massive problems have much of the world now concerned about radiation doses. Here is a radiation dose chart courtesy of Canada Free Press who deserve a Hat Tip. Click on it to make it larger.

Radiation Dose Chart from Canada Free Press

Comments Off on Radiation Dose Chart

Filed under Co2 Insanity, Japan, Japan Earthquake, Radiation

Greenpeace at it again.

You have to love those nutty Greenpeace activist mountain climbing in downtown Berlin, Germany. Per Earth times we get this little blurb……

Berlin – Greenpeace demonstrators on Monday abseiled down the facade of Germany’s environment ministry to hang a banner protesting against the government’s extension of nuclear power.

The 10 metre by 20 metre banner said “Ministry for Nuclear Power and Corporate Interests”. The sign was visible from Alexanderplatz, a main square in the Berlin.

The environmentalist group is upset at Germany’s plans to extend the legal lifetimes of 17 existing nuclear power plants by an average of 12 years and to resume work to create a long-term nuclear waste depository.

Well, I’m upset that no matter what it is or where it is Greenpeace doesn’t like it. They bitch and moan about CO2 then when someone wants to put in nuclear that doesn’t pump out CO2 they bitch about that. Perhaps they should change their name to Bitchpeace. Seems more fitting to me.

More CO2 Insanity.

Source: Earth Times

Comments Off on Greenpeace at it again.

Filed under Co2 Insanity, Global Warming, Greenpeace

Nuclear Option for Deepwater Horizon Leak?

[kml_flashembed movie="http://www.youtube.com/v/QptDY5QdeXE" width="425" height="344" allowfullscreen="true" fvars="fs=1" /]

The nuclear option for sealing the massive leak from the Deepwater Horizon oil well in the Gulf of Mexico has been mentioned before, including on this blog, and for the most part seemed to get laughs as being implausible.  Frankly when I posted here about the North Koreans possibly causing this and the solution being an atomic bomb, I was only about half serious, as both notions seemed beyond the realm of reality. I guess this is what me and a lot of other people get for thinking it being silly as it’s come back in the form of reality to bite us in the butt.

According to this article in Telegraph.co.uk, this may not be as unrealistic as you think.  In fact it appears President Obama may be giving this serious contemplation.

The US has sent a team of nuclear physicists to help BP plug the “catastrophic” flow of oil into the Gulf of Mexico from its leaking Deepwater Horizon well, as the Obama administration becomes frustrated with the oil giant’s inability to control the situation.

The five-man team – which includes a man who helped develop the first hydrogen bomb in the 1950s – is the brainchild of Steven Chu, President Obama’s Energy Secretary.

He has charged the men with finding solutions to stop the flow of oil.

Evidently the President has had it with the buck-passing and the inability of BP to stop this massive oil leak.

The five scientists visited BP’s main crisis centre in Houston earlier this week, along with Mr Chu, and are to continue to work with the company’s scientists and external advisers to reach an answer.

In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, Mr Hayward said the five-hour meeting involved a “very deep dive” into the situation at hand, with “lots of nuclear physicists and all sorts of people coming up with some quite good ideas actually.”

Pressed further about the meeting, he said they had “come up with one good idea” but declined to elaborate.

I wonder if this “one good idea” involves a rather large bang?

The five include 82-year-old Richard Garwin, who designed the first hydrogen bomb, and Tom Hunter, head of the US Department of Energy’s Sandia National Labs.

In addition, Mr Chu has already dispatched Marcia McNutt, the head of the US Geological Service, to the oil company.

When you have one of the men who’s the father of the Hydrogen Bomb being dispatched about this, it really does sound like this is going to be a serious consideration, especially if BP’s other attempts to plug this leak up fail.  You have to consider that using “the bomb” may cause less damage than the massive oil slick will.  I heard one scientists on the radio today who figured it could actually be blowing out as much as 100,000 gallons of oil per day.

Regardless of what you think about CO2, global warming, or climate change, this is a disaster that may make anything in the past pale in comparison and I’m all for whatever will stop this.  The faster the better.

Source: Telegraph.co.uk

Comments Off on Nuclear Option for Deepwater Horizon Leak?

Filed under Co2 Insanity, Stranger than Truth

Think Solar and Wind are the Way to Go?

Think solar and wind are cheap alternatives to coal power plants? Per this paper from Peter Lang, Emission Cuts Realities – Electricity Generation they’re not as cheap as you think, not to mention as feasible.

Abstract

Five options for cutting CO2 emissions from electricity generation in Australia are compared with a “Business as Usual‟ option over the period 2010 to 2050. The six options comprise combinations of coal, gas, nuclear, wind and solar thermal technologies.

The conclusions: The nuclear option reduces CO2 emissions the most, is the only option that can be built quickly enough to make the deep emissions cuts required, and is the least cost of the options that can cut emissions sustainably. Solar thermal and wind power are the highest cost of the options considered. The cost of avoiding emissions is lowest with nuclear and highest with solar and wind power.

Peter Lang is a retired geologist and engineer with 40 years experience on a wide range of energy projects throughout the world, including managing energy R&D and providing policy advice for government and opposition. His experience includes: coal, oil, gas, hydro, geothermal, nuclear power plants, nuclear waste disposal, and a wide range of energy end use management projects

I hope you enjoy his paper, which goes to show you again, that the people in charge need to start looking before they’re leaping.  Per this paper they’re wasting time and money on boondoggles, when they should be building nuclear power plants that will reduce CO2 with the best cost-benefit and quickest effect.

1 Comment

Filed under Financial, Peter Lang, Renewable Energy

The Madness of King Rudd

UPDATE: I got booted out of office!

Author: Terence Cardwell

In 1994 they made a movie called ‘The Madness of King George.’ A true story about the eccentric and erratic behaviour of King George the 3rd of England, who exhibited increasing strange and eccentric behaviour, ignoring all logic and common sense to do as he wished.

In the near future they will no doubt be making another one based on the same behaviour of Kevin Rudd, called ‘The Madness of King Rudd.’

In spite of all the screaming facts from all corners of the globe that now has become apparent about renewable energy and global warming Kevin Rudd still refuses to listen or look at the truth and still declares that 20% of our power generation will be renewable energy.

——- IT IS PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO DO THAT.

And if it was possible (and I repeat it is not) the influence from the unreliable wind or solar generators would cause instability in the power grid system as they continually change without any warning.

Also there would have to be a spinning reserve in the grid system in excess of 20%. plus normal spinning reserve to cover the largest unit ( in N.S.W. 660MWs)  plus spare.

That reserve would be covered by thermal power station units backed off sufficiently in load to immediately pick up if required. This affects their generation efficiency as they are at maximum efficiency at full load. Thus increasing generation cost.

And no you cannot just ‘turn them on and off’ like light switches. To bring a coal fired thermal unit to at least mid load or better operating level can take up to twelve hours or more from a cold start.

Hot starts are quicker but are not good for the unit on a continuous basis. Generators are designed to stay on line and operating continuously and they normally do that for months on end. Usually more than a year requiring only normal service shutdowns.

The power grid system in any country is a very closely controlled, finely tuned and highly sensitive network that must maintain  the system voltage and frequency within very fine limits.

To subject it to major (i.e.20%) unregulated continual variations in power input can create control problems and instability.

More gas turbine are being installed but these only have a relatively small output and are used for peak loads, not load control.

I read an article recently by a Melbourne university lecturer where he stated that coal fired thermal power generation units were slow and could not respond to load changes.

It is this type of erroneous completely wrong statements from someone who should know better, that deliberately mislead the community.

Coal fired thermal power generators can respond rapidly to system load changes and can cover the instant loss of the largest unit (660 megawatts) without instability being created in the system. It is this type of response that is required to compensate for the erratic output from wind and solar generators if they were to have a 20% input to the grid.

One wonders if Kevin Rudd has an ulterior motive for doing his best to destroy the power industry. Surely no one can be that blind and stupid to not see the glaring truth about the so called renewable energy farce.

It is not about what political persuasion or beliefs  you have. It is about facts and the truth. Certainly anything cleaner or cheaper is welcomed but only IF it IS cheaper, NOT because the greenies or wind generator and solar array manufacturers say so.

The cost to install, operate and maintain them is very high. Wind generators have killed hundreds of thousands of birds with bird strikes throughout the world.

Here are some of those “screaming facts.’

In the early 1980s California was seduced by renewable energy and proceeded to offer subsidies to anyone wanting to erect a wind generator. This subsidy ceased in the late 1990s as they ran out of money due to bankruptcy.

By 2008 they had over 18000 wind generators scattered across California——————————-14000 of them no longer operate, some were cannibalised to keep the other running.

California power cost has now doubled. Their thermal power generation has increased continually to compensated for this disaster and the input from the wind generators, after 30 years of development,produces only 2.3% of California’s electricity. An extremely small percentage and erratic output.

There is also over 15000 birds killed per year by  bird strikes from wind generators.

Spain also embraced renewable energy with wind generators and solar array farms. A recent detailed analysis found that for every job created by state-funded support of renewables, particularly wind energy, 2.2 jobs were lost. Each wind industry job created cost almost $2-million in subsidies.

They now have an unemployment rate of 19%. The cost of power has gone up 100% and they are forced to import power from other countries.

Germany has over 7000 wind generators with over 2500 wind generator failures last year alone. The German experience is no different. Der Spiegel reports that “Germany’s CO2 emissions haven’t been reduced by even a single gram,” and additional coal- and gas-fired plants have been constructed to ensure reliable supply.

Sweden has 5000 wind generators and 2000 wind generator failures.

During the cold weather in Europe last December a large number of wind generators froze up and did not work at all. When they finally did they only generated 4% of their capacity.

Denmark, the world’s most wind-intensive nation, with more than 6,000 turbines generating 19% of its electricity, has yet to close a single fossil-fuel plant. It requires 50% more coal-generated electricity to cover wind power’s unpredictability, and pollution and carbon dioxide

emissions have risen by 36% in 2006 alone and continues to rise.. Its electricity generation costs are the highest in Europe.

Niels Gram of the Danish Federation of Industries says, “Windmills are a mistake and economically make no sense.”

Aase Madsen , the Chair of Energy Policy in the Danish Parliament, calls it “a terribly expensive disaster.”

Wind generators only generate an average of 30% of their capacity averaged over a month and are completely inconsistent, varying in output between zero and 70% and rarely reaching their maximum capacity.

For wind generators to provide 20% renewable energy in Australia there would have to be over 7000 of them assuming they were 5MW units with the usual generation capability of 30%.

Every Megawatt they generate would have to be backed up by a spinning reserve in the power grid system ready to compensate for their inconsistency. Which neutralises any advantage they may offer.

Wind generators are ideal for boats or isolated areas where they can charge a bank of wet cell batteries providing a continuous power supply. But are of great expense and are of no advantage to the power grid system.

Solar power Generation is in two forms.

Solar thermal generation is where the reflectors are concentrated on a central receiver which then heats a liquid such as sodium, which in turn heats the water to generate steam that drives a turbine coupled to a generator.

The problem is the heat is only available in strong sunlight and increases throughout the day and then falls off to nothing in the evening when there is insufficient sunlight to heat and drive the turbine. It then stops generating. This inactivity occurs for 14hrs of the day and the continual heating and cooling is not good for steam turbine operation.

These units, even though they cover a large area, only generate small amounts of power and add little to power demands.

Solar Electric Generation through solar array farms is more common where the panels generate power from sunlight stimulation. They are very expensive per kilowatt generated to install and require high maintenance to keep them clean and are susceptible to damage from storms and falling objects.

The total peak power generated in Australia is approximately 50,000MWs.

The World’s largest (currently) operating solar power generation plant is the Olmedilla Photovoltaic Park in Spain, and this needs an area of 250 hectares to generate 60MWs in bright sunlight. So let’s put this into perspective.

There are 100 hectares to the square kilometer, and using Olmedilla as a guide, one square kilometer will generate 24MWs.

Theoretically therefore, at maximum generation on a bright sunny day the generation of 10,000MWs to power 20% of Australia’s needs would require a solar array covering an area of 420 square kilometers – a massive area.

However because such a plant would only generate at approximately 20%-30% of its capacity measured over a year, the full size area needed would have to be five times larger, i.e. 2100 square kilometers.

Then there is a minor (?) problem: these plants do not  generate at night!!

So, here are some hard facts about solar generation:

1. Supply is more consistent in continually sunny areas e.g. Saudi Arabia, Queensland, Africa, etc., therefore solar generation would not be very effective in areas such as U.K., Europe, Russia, etc. where it is far more overcast. Solar power requires bright sunlight for maximum performance. The output can vary dependent on how overcast it is.

2. Solar generation is only possible during daylight hours where there is sufficient sunlight, approximately eight to ten hours per day; therefore it does not generate anything for between 14 and 16 hours per day.

3. Output cannot be controlled except for changing angles of those arrays fitted with moving solar panels.

4. The supply is unreliable, although more consistent than wind generation which is notoriously unreliable and thermal, nuclear, or hydro power (if available) is required to carry sufficient reserve in the grid system to compensate for any changes in solar plant output due to any changes in sunlight during the day.

5. It is very expensive per kilowatt to install, and expensive per kilowatt to operate and maintain. The solar panel receivers have to be continuously kept clean of bird droppings, dust, and rubbish; and they can be damaged in severe weather (for example in the recent severe hailstorm in Melbourne).

As a power ‘add on’, solar ‘farms’ are useful but could never play anything more than a small part of the grid system because of their inflexible and unreliable nature. The same applies even more so to wind generators.

A note about solar power generation for your home:

The solar program subsidised by the federal government has an output of 1 to 1.5 kilowatts. Provided the sun shines brightly and there is no cloud cover.

The power usage of the average Australian family (i.e. 2 adults + 2 children) is approximately 3 to 4 kilowatts during the day and the additional power required would be drawn from the grid system

Even at night while you are asleep some 0.8 to 1.5 kilowatts is still required to keep things going, such as a refrigerator If you start to run things such as air-conditioning then inevitably your power demand must increase and all power is drawn from the power grid.

The cost of a 1.7kW system is somewhere between $7,000 & $8,000 after allowing for the present Australian Government subsidy. The cost before the subsidy is somewhere between $13,000 & $14,000.

The good news is that a far more efficient solar photovoltaic panels has been invented in Israel, and this is reported to be 400% more efficient than present panels. However these are still being tested and developed and not yet ready for general use.

Hydro Electric is the perfect Power Generation but we are using all available water resources and there is no more available to increase its capacity.

Hydro generation is 4.6% of total generation and can only run when there is sufficient water from spring snow melt and rain water.

Geothermal is good if you are in New Zealand but there is none in Australia except for the ‘Hot Rocks’ experiments which so far has only met with failure.

Tidal and wave Generation is being developed but would only have a very minor possible power generation capability for the foreseeable future. In the distant future (50 years) I believe we may develop it substantially.

Nuclear Power generation is proving throughout the world to be the ideal power generation system. Especially with the new revolutionary 4thgeneration Liquid fluoride Thorium Reactor systems that solves all the problems associated with nuclear power. LFTRs consume 100% of the thorium fed to them and can be started with spent fuel rods or old nuclear warheads.

LFTRs will inevitably be used as janitors cleaning up old nuclear waste.

A very exciting concept for power generation.

In the past three years the Rudd government has squandered billions of dollars on;

A. Clean coal technology.  A complete failure.

B. Hot rocks programmes, Still struggling to get any form of result.

C. Power stations with CO2 deep storage.  Massive cost for a teaspoon of power.

D. Renewable energy projects.  Could never achieve a viable usage or cost.

E. Home Insulation programmes. A total waste of money and a disaster.

F. Solar Power on homes. Will have negligible effect on power generation.

All have been either a failure or worse a disaster as in the insulation program.

AND FOR WHY?

Oh yes that’s right !!!  To reduce our ‘carbon footprint’. What a ridiculous name. One imagines a big black boot covered in graphite leaving a mess on the carpet.  When they actually mean carbon dioxide emissions.

Carbon Dioxide the gas essential to all life and they call it a pollutant.

SO HOW DOES ALL THE ABOVE REDUCE CARBON DIOXIDE EMISSIONS.

Ah yes! By reducing the amount of electrical power from the thermal power stations that generate over 94% of our energy. Therefore reducing the CO2 coming  out of the stacks.

Except for one minor point!!!!!!

In 2008-2009 Australia’s power stations produced approximately 276 billion kilowatt hours (TWh) of electricity*, 71.5% more than the 1990 level and growing at 4% pa.

This growth in production is normal and has not even dropped in the slightest due to the above programmes.

The power returned to the grid system from domestic solar panels would be an irritating and a very expensive teaspoon full in a 200 litre drum.

The federal and state governments have spent many billions of dollars of ours and our children’s  economic future chasing butterflies.

One final point; NOT ONE of the doomsday predictions from as far back as 1979 has eventuated or proven to be true.

Global warming will be forever in our history as the biggest scam EVER perpetrated on mankind putting billions of dollars in the pockets of those that have promoted the scam and those ‘scientists’ that have been highly paid to  come up with ‘positive’ results.

( Remember the computer 2000 millennium bug.)

The eruption of the volcano  in Iceland that is emitting millions of tons of sulphur dioxide, ash and carbon dioxide daily make man’s efforts extremely puny and ridiculous.

The madness of the federal and state governments in this horrific waste of money must be stopped before they bankrupt the country.

Terence Cardwell

1 Comment

Filed under Financial, Politics, Renewable Energy, Terence Cardwell