The Big Six On The Run

How renewables are disrupting big energy firms everywhere

The biggest story you’ve never been told An energy revolution is underway across the globe,and the old order is running scared. Big energy firms, once the greatest beneficiaries of liberalised electricity markets, are suddenly seeing their profit margins slump, their very futures imperilled. The traditional privatised utility model that has reigned supreme for twenty-five years is being rapidly undermined. The effects are being felt most

strongly in Germany and the US – but increasingly Britain’s Big Six energy firms are also under threat.

In short, the Big Six are on the run. What’s causing them to take fright is the disruptive power of renewable energy – particularly small-scale renewables owned by lots of people. The reasons for this are actually quite simple, but seldom explained.

The first reason is that the Big Six are facing a growing army of competitors. When the utilities were first privatised in the 1980s, they portrayed themselves as the face of a new popular capitalism.The famous ‘Tell Sid’ adverts of the Thatcher years caught the mood as thousands of people bought up shares in the new energy companies. But as the electricity market developed the number of shareholders and firms dwindled and ossified into the small oligopoly of suppliers that exist today.

NUCLEAR POWER'S DARK FUTURE

BY BRAHMA CHELLANEYE

Nuclear power constitutes the world’s most subsidy-fattened energy industry, yet it faces an increasingly uncertain future. The global nuclear power industry has enjoyed growing state subsidies over the years, even as it generates the most dangerous wastes whose safe disposal saddles future generations.

Despite the fat subsidies, new developments are highlighting the nuclear power industry’s growing travails. For example, France — the “poster child” of atomic power — is rethinking its love affair with nuclear energy. Its parliament voted last month to cut the country’s nuclear-generating capacity by a third by 2025 and focus instead on renewable sources by emulating neighboring countries like Germany and Spain.

As nuclear power becomes increasingly uneconomical at home because of skyrocketing costs, the U.S. and France are aggressively pushing exports, not just to India and China, but also to “nuclear newcomers,” such as the cash-laden oil sheikhdoms in the Persian Gulf. Such exports raise new challenges related to freshwater resources, nuclear safety and nuclear-weapons proliferation.

Still, the bulk of the reactors under construction or planned worldwide are in just four countries — China, Russia, South Korea and India.

Six decades after Lewis Strauss, the chairman of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, claimed that nuclear energy would become “too cheap to meter,” nuclear power confronts an increasingly uncertain future, largely because of unfavorable economics. The just-released International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook 2014 report states: “Uncertainties continue to cloud the future for nuclear — government policy, public confidence, financing in liberalized markets, competitiveness versus other sources of generation, and the looming retirement of a large fleet of older plants.”

A Much Cheaper Grid Battery Comes to Market | MIT Technology Review

A Much Cheaper Grid Battery Comes to Market | MIT Technology Review

A new kind of battery that stores energy from solar and wind power cheaply and cleanly has hit the market. It is by far the cheapest of a new generation of large, long-lived batteries that could make it possible to rely heavily on intermittent, renewable energy sources.

Aquion Energy, a company spun out of Carnegie Mellon University, recently delivered the first of its batteries to operators of small power grids, or “microgrids,” that can operate independently of the centralized grid.

Microgrids, which typically use local energy sources such as wind, solar, and hydropower, could help hundreds of millions of people who live beyond conventional grids get reliable electricity. Batteries can store power from solar panels or wind turbines to provide round-the-clock power. Alternatively, diesel generators can be used.

Bombs Ahoy! Why the UK is desperate for nuclear power

Oliver Tickell

On the face of it, the UK government's obsession with nuclear power defies reason. It's very expensive, inflexible, creates 'existential' threats and imposes enormous 'long tail' liabilities tens of thousands of years into the future. But there is a simple explanation: it's all to maintain the UK's status as a nuclear WMD state.

The UK's civil nuclear programme is almost entirely motivated by the UK's wish to maintain its status as a nuclear WMD state.

The UK's proposed support package for the Hinkley C nuclear power station in Somerset is gigantic. Estimates of its cost range up to £100 billion or so.

Of course it's hard to put a precise figure on it, as the subsidies take so many forms, and many of the commitments represent a guarantee against unknown and unquantifiable eventualities. But to summarisethey include:

• a generous guaranteed purchase price for its electricity, at £92.50 per megawatt-hour - about double the current going rate - also inflation adjusted from now, and lasting for 35 years after it begins to produce power;
• £10 billion of Treasury guarantees on its construction cost;
• a guaranteed maximum exposure to the operator, EDF, on its waste management and decomissioning costs;
• the limitation of EDF's liabilities in the event of any major nuclear accident at €700 million, when nuclear accidents can impose costs in the $100s of billions;
• a variety of pump priming exercises to lubricate the nuclear supply chain, and direct support to Sheffield Forgemasters, a manufacturer of nuclear reactor vessels;
• a panoply of expenditures for nuclear R&D by way of research councils.

And all this just for a single 2.4GW power station that would generate just 20TWh of our 350TWh per year electricity usage.

Nuclear power: reliably unreliable | Greenpeace International

Blogpost by Justin McKeating - 26 August, 2014 at 12:42

With wind power filling the energy gap left by shutdown nuclear reactors in the UK, and police investigating allegations of sabotage at a reactor in Belgium, the myth of "reliable" nuclear energy is being exposed like never before.

The nuclear industry tells us that nuclear power is a reliable energy source, that it offers "energy security". Tell that to Belgium and the UK who are seeing significant parts of their nuclear fleet shutdown.

It's been confirmed that the major damage that shut down Belgium's Doel 4 reactor was caused by sabotage. Meanwhile, cracks found in two other reactors – Tihange 2 and Doel 3 - means they may never reopen. The three reactors make up over half of the country's nuclear power output.

(Worryingly, there are 22 other reactors around the world that share the same design as Tihange 2 and Doel 3.)

In the UK, four nuclear reactors – at Heysham and Hartlepool – are out of action while defects are investigated.

There have previously been issues with nuclear power plants being closed in EU and USA at times of drought because of water shortages.

What fills the energy gap while these "reliable" nuclear reactors are shut down?

Belgium is having to rely on electricity from its neighbours. So much for nuclear power giving the country energy security.

In the UK, things are much more optimistic. Renewable energy has come to the rescue. "Demand is low at this time of year, and a lot of wind power is being generated right now," said the UK's National Grid. Electricity supplies have been unaffected.

DIRTY NUCLEAR POWER - WHAT IS THE DRIVING FORCE BEHIND IT

The story of nuclear energy as a dirty and one of the most undesirable source for realising energy security is apparent to one and all of the well meaning citizenry of our globe. Yet in today's world there are nations selling this technology and there are nations willing to buy this technology which is not in sync with the 21st century energy scenario and is almost under obsolescence.Every now and then we come across reports that nuclear is generating less of world's power and renewables are accelerating. But strangely the thrust towards renewables is languishing in spite of the realisation that the eternal solution to energy security lies in harnessing the renewable sources.

The world must shift to solar and wind power rapidly to avoid catastrophic global warming, say UN scientists in a major report. At the same time frequent news items/assessments by the nuclear mafia comprising of polity, industrial cartels, and technical/scientific groups with their own ulterior motives and vested interests keep on writing that nuclear power is absolutely necessary for providing energy security to mankind on our globe. The exponents of nuclear power base their logic on the fact that it is a clean energy and is an absolute must for controlling global warming. No doubt it is clean when it comes to carbon emissions of nuclear power plant during production of power. Factually the much touted clean nuclear power results in up to 25 times more carbon emissions than wind energy when reactor construction and uranium refining and transport are considered. When the problems of fuel processing are taken into account, Nuclear fuels are a curse on humanity from the stage of ore to fuel elements to waste.

• The nuclear technology masters have put in enormous money into the basic researches, plant engineering, creation of technology infrastructure etc. etc. and they will be guided by the urge to milk these investments at all costs, by all means, fair or foul. Their economy and status of economic superpower is far too dependent on the nuclear activity around this globe and the only way to sustain this is through sales gimmicks, decrying renewables and withholding basic facts about the need to go in solely for renewables. 

• Nuclear power plants give the technology providers an all time stranglehold on buyers from mineral rich African and South American countries because of  the necessity to get timely fuel and spares and the disposal of spent fuel. As if that were not enough, even after the useful life of the plant the stranglehold continues for requirements of decommissioning and dismantling. In fact decommissioning is extremely intricate and expensive. 
• Surprisingly no new nuclear plants have come up on their soils during the last forty years or so and in fact they are trying to reduce the contributions of nuclear power, the so called panacea of all energy security requirements. Recently French President Francois Hollande unveiled $13.4 billion energy plans and spelt out plans to reduce its reliance on nuclear power from 75% to 50%. Though while selling nuclear power plants it is said that atomic power is the best, cheapest, safest and cleanest solution to energy security.

Now a word about the motivation or compulsion of prospective buyers. Today hardly any nation wants to buy a nuclear power plant for the sake of power. Either it is being forced into buying in lieu of a barter of investments in other areas or it has some hidden agenda or sinister designs.The recent quest of Iran building four new nuclear power plants is a typical case in point. All buyers want to have an access to the nuclear fuel ultimately to become a full fledged nuclear nation or adding on its capacity to hold this world to ransom through dirty bombs.

Dutch trains to be fully wind powered by 2018

16 May 2014 by Patrick Smith, Be the first to comment

NETHERLANDS: Dutch trains will be wholly powered by energy from wind projects from 2018 under a deal struck between the rail operators and renewable energy firm Eneco.

Starting from next year, 50% of the system's energy will be provided by wind farms, rising to 70% in 2016 and 95% in 2017, according to the deal agreed with Vivens, the rail operators' energy procurement joint venture.

By 2018, all of the 1.4TWh of energy used to power the country's trains will be sourced from wind projects that are completed this year or later rather than just purchased on the energy market.

"The underlying aim is to avoid procuring energy from the limited existing number of sustainable energy projects in the Netherlands as this would ramp up market prices... and at the same time [we aim] to boost the process of generating green power," the company said.

Two Contrasting Views Of Our Energy Future (via Planetsave)

The issue of where we will get our energy from in the coming decades is becoming ever more urgent. CO2 is accumulating in the atmosphere at alarming rates, and the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change recently stated that the majority of known…

---

Microgrids — Benefits For Reliability & Renewables (via Clean Technica)

Originally published on ABB Conversations.By William Galton Microgrids offer advantages for reliability and bringing more renewables onto the grid. 1. What are the benefits of integrating renewable energy with microgrids? The obvious first benefit…

---

The world must shift to solar and wind power rapidly to avoid catastrophic global warming, say UN scientists in major report | Mail Online

A rapid shift to wind and solar power is needed if the world is to avoid catastrophic global warming, the United Nations warns in a crucial report today.

Emissions of greenhouse gases need to be cut by up to 70 per cent before 2050 to control climate change, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says.
‘Large-scale changes in energy systems’ are required, with coal power stations to be switched off and replaced by wind and solar.

And the transformation needs to be made in the next 15 years or controlling climate change will become increasingly harder and more expensive.

The report was published in Berlin today after a week of line-by-line drafting and re-drafting.

The final version, written by 235 international scientists and economists, says that efforts so far have failed to stop spiralling emissions of greenhouse gases – which have risen to ‘unprecedented levels’ in the past decade.

Ottmar Edenhofer, co-chair of the authors, said: ‘There is a clear message from science: to avoid dangerous interference with the climate system, we need to move away from business as usual.’

The IPCC report is the first major assessment in seven years of the options for dealing with climate change.

Deconstructing the myths about nuclear power

Peter Bunyard disposes of the argument for nuclear power: it is highly uneconomical, and the saving on greenhouse gas emissions negligible, if any, compared to a gas-fired electricity generating plant

Peter Bunyard will be speaking at Sustainable World Conference, 14-15 July 2005.

References to this article are posted on ISIS members’ website. Details here

Limitations due to the quality of uranium ore

A critical point about the practicability of nuclear power to provide clean energy under global warming is the quality and grade of the uranium ore. The quality of uranium ore varies inversely with their availability on a logarithmic scale. The ores used at present, such as the carnotite ores in the United States have an uranium content of up to 0.2 per cent, and vast quantities of overlying rocks and subsoil have to be shifted to get to the 96,000 tonnes of uranium-containing rock and shale that will provide the fresh fuel for a one gigawatt reactor [1].

In addition, most of the ore is left behind as tailings with considerable quantities of radioactivity from thorium-230, a daughter product of the radioactive decay of uranium. Thorium has a half-life of 77 000 years and decays into radium-226, which decays into the gas radon-222. All are potent carcinogens.

Fresh fuel for one reactor contains about 10 curies of radioactivity (27 curies equal 1012 becquerels, each of the latter being one radiation event per second.) The tailings corresponding to that contain 67 curies of radioactive material, much of it exposed to weathering and rain run-off. Radon gas has been found 1 000 miles from the mine tailings from where it originated. Uranium extraction has resulted in more than 6 billion tonnes of radioactive tailings, with significant impact on human health [2].

Once the fuel is used in a reactor, it becomes highly radioactive primarily because of fission products and the generation of the ‘transuranics’ such as neptunium and americium. At discharge from the reactor, a tonne of irradiated fuel from a PWR (pressurized water reactor such as in use at Sizewell) will contain more than 177 million curies of radioactive substances, some admittedly short-lived, but all the more potent in the short term. Ten years later, the radioactivity has died away to about 405 000 curies and 100 years on to 42 000 curies, therefore still 600 times more radioactive than the original material from which the fuel was derived [3].

Today’s reactors, totalling 350 GW and providing about 3 per cent of the total energy used in the world, consume 60 000 tonnes of equivalent natural uranium, prior to enrichment. At that rate, economically recoverable reserves of uranium — about 10 million tonnes — would last less than 100 years. A worldwide nuclear programme of 1 000 nuclear reactors would consume the uranium within 50 years, and if all the world’s electricity, currently 60 exajoules (1018Joules) were generated by nuclear reactors, the uranium would last three years [4]. The prospect that the amount of economically recoverable uranium would limit a worldwide nuclear power programme was certainly appreciated by the United Kingdom Atomic Energy in its advocacy for the fast breeder reactor, which theoretically could increase the quantity of energy to be derived from uranium by a factor of 70 through converting non-fissile uranium-238 into plutonium-239.

In the Authority’s journal [5], Donaldson, D.M., and Betteridge, G.E. stated that, “for a nuclear contribution that expands continuously to about 50 per cent of demand, uranium resources are only adequate for about 45 years.”

The earth’s crust and oceans contain millions upon millions of tonnes of uranium. The average in the crust is 0.0004 per cent and in seawater 2 000 times more dilute. One identified resource, the Tennessee shales in the United States, have uranium concentrations of between 10 and 100 parts per million, therefore between 0.1 and 0.01 per cent. Such low grade ore has little effective energy content as measured by the amount of electricity per unit mass of mined ore [6].

Below 50 parts per million, the energy extracted is no better than mining coal, assuming that the uranium is used in a once-through fuel cycle, and is not reprocessed, but is dumped in some long-term repository. Apart from the self-evident dangers of dissolving spent fuel in acid and keeping the bulk of radioactive waste in stainless steel tanks until a final disposal is found, reprocessing offers very little if at all in terms of energy gained through the extraction and re-use of uranium and plutonium in mixed oxide fuel (MOX) [7].

Grameen Shakti for Renewable Energies

Dipal Barua of Bangladesh had won the 2009 Abu Dhabi government’s Zayed Future Energy Prize in recognition of his work of bringing renewable energy technologies to rural people. The prize included US$1.5 million, which Barua has used to start the Bright Green Energy Foundation. He is intent on making his country one of the world first “solar nations”. He wants to train 100 000 women entrepreneurs to set up their own renewable energy businesses by 2015; and Bangladesh can become a role model for the 1.6 billion energy-starved people all over the world [1].

He has devoted most of his life to finding sustainable, market-based solutions to the social and economic problems of rural people, and came to realize that lack of access to efficient energy sources was one of the major obstacles to their development. “More than 70 percent of my country’s rural population has to depend on primitive energy sources. This limits people’s economic opportunities and damages their health.” He said.

From Grameen Bank to Grameen Shakti

Barua was one of the founding members of the Grameen Bank, the Nobel price-winning micro-finance and community development bank launched in his home village of Jobra in 1976.

In 1996, Barua founded Grameen Shakti (GS), a non-profit organization with a mission to promote, develop and supply renewable energy. As managing director, Barua turned GS into one of the world’s largest and fastest growing renewable energy companies. But attempts to market affordable solar homes initially faced numerous obstacles.

In a country where some 40 percent of the population live on less than US$1.25 a day, the cost of even the most basic solar home system – 15 000 Bangladeshi Taka (US$212)  – was beyond the reach of most rural households; even though for the cost of the kerosene people were buying to light their homes, they could buy a solar home system that would last for 20 years or more, with better, cleaner lighting thrown in along with numerous other uses of the electricity generated.

GS received a big boost in 2002 when low-interest loans from the World Bank and the Global Environment Fund enabled the organization to begin scaling up its provision of micro-finance agreements.  The most popular option was a down-payment of 15 percent and monthly repayments of the remainder over three years.

By the end of 2009, more than 300 000 solar home systems had been installed, bringing electricity to more than 2 million people.

Women the key to success

The key to GS’ success was the deliberate involvement of women in both the take-up of renewable energy, and the installation and servicing of the energy systems.

“Women are the main victims of the energy crisis. They are the ones who suffer most from indoor air pollution, drudgery, and a lack of time because of the onerous task of wood-gathering and cooking.” Barua said. He believes that women should be transformed from passive victim into active forces of good to bring changes in their lives and the communities in which they live.

At more than 40 technology centres based in rural areas, and managed mostly by female engineers, women undergo an initial 15 day course to learn how to assemble charge controllers and mobile phone chargers, and to install and maintain solar home systems. With further training, they are able to repair the systems. Thousands of women technician have come through the programme, and they have been instrumental in the rapid take-up of the solar power systems. For Barua, the success of the women technicians programme is one of his most satisfying achievements.

The women now earn around US$150 a month. “These young women from this most conservative of societies can leave home and operate independently as technicians – this as unimaginable only a few years ago.”

Grameen Shakti for renewable energies

GS was established as a not-for-profit company in 1996 with a mission to empower the rural people with access to green energy and income. The Chairman from the beginning was Professor Muhammed Yunus, and the Managing Director, Dipal Barua [2].

Some 60 percent of the Bangladesh population have no access to grid electricity and rely on kerosene for lighting, while 97 percent of the population depend on biomass for cooking.

The work of GS is mainly focussed on solar energy, biogas, organic fertiliser, and improved cooking stove (ICS) [3]. Apart from selling and providing microcredit for installing solar systems, biogas plants and ICSs, GS also organises technical training, maintenance, after sales service and introduces these products at the mass level.

More than 315 000 units of solar energy system have been installed in remote rural areas of Bangladesh by December 2009, with a combined power generation capacity of 63 MW. Some 13 000 solar energy systems are installed per month. People are saving money that they have had to spend on traditional fuels, and at the same time cutting greenhouse emissions.

GS has been operating biogas plants in different areas of Bangladesh since 2005 [3]. Approximately 8 000 biogas plants have been installed by December 2009, and high quality organic fertiliser is being produced from the slurry of biogas plants.

The ICSs are 50 to 60 percent more efficient than the traditional stoves they replace; and over 45 000 have been constructed so far.

Solar farms 'will not spread unrestricted across British countryside' | Environment | theguardian.com

Carmaker Jaguar announced the completion of the UK’s largest rooftop solar array, with 21,000 panels on the roof of their engine factory in Staffordshire providing a capacity of 5.8MW. Photograph: Jaguar Land Rover press office

Solar farms must not spread unrestricted across the British countryside and become as controversial as onshore wind turbines, a minister warned on Friday.

Instead, solar panels will be rolled out on millions of homes, businesses, schools and government buildings, said energy and climate change minister Greg Barker.

Barker, one the greenest Conservative ministers, launched the government's first solar power strategy at the end of a week in which senior Tory sources revealed their plans to heavily curb or even dismantle windfarms after the next election.

The number of large solar farms, often housing more than 100,000 panels, has doubled in the first three months of 2014 but some have attracted local protests.

At the opening of a new Sunsolar panel factory in Birmingham, Barker told the Guardian: "I do not want solar farms to become the new onshore wind. Solar power enjoys huge popularity, so we have to be careful. I do not want to see unrestricted growth of solar farms in the British countryside."

Barker has previously called large farms "monsters" and, due the subsidies they receive, "gold-diggers".

But he said there was a great opportunity elsewhere for solar power, which has fallen in price by two-thirds in the last four years. Barker said he expected the 500,000 homes with solar panels to double by the end of 2015.

He also announced streamlined planning rules to make it simpler to put panels on large industrial and commercial roofs. Putting panels on just one in six roofs would generate electricity equivalent to two nuclear power stations. On Thursday, carmaker Jaguar announced the completion of the UK's largest rooftop solar array, with 21,000 panels on the roof of their engine factory in Staffordshire providing a capacity of 5.8MW.

Barker also announced a programme to put up to 4m solar panels (1GW), on the roofs of government-owned buildings across the UK before the end of the next parliament in 2020. A new unit in the Cabinet Office, under Francis Maude, is working on this programme, which will be funded by the private sector.

Carbon-Free, Nuclear-Free Energy Economy Is Inevitable

While a clean energy future is inevitable, questions remain about how quickly we will get there.

The impossible has become inevitable. A carbon-free, nuclear-free energy economy is our future. Despite the energy industry's hard work to keep energy dirty and damaging, the future will be clean and sustainable. Government is not leading the way. The new energy revolution is coming from the ground up, not the top down.

The United States and world face a series of interconnected crises: climate change caused by carbon-based energies like oil and methane gas; a shrinking supply of carbon fuel that has led to wars for oil and extreme extraction methods using tar sands, hydro-fracking, mountaintop removal and deep off-shore drilling; and proliferation of nuclear weapons of mass destruction and long-term environmental damage from the production of nuclear energy.

The human and environmental costs of fossil fuel and nuclear power as sources of energy are being felt by a growing number of people worldwide. At the same time, there is a realization that the government is doing little to nothing to encourage a transition from extractive to clean renewable sources. Instead, the Obama administration reveals its alliance with the status quo through the revolving door between industry insiders and government positions, the use of energy industry consultants to perform environmental impact statements, the suppression of unfavorable analyses and disregard for the concerns of people who are affected by energy extraction.

Fukushima - A Global Threat That Requires a Global Response

Workers take soil samples in Ukedo, Japan, which was evacuated after the Fukushima nuclear disaster, August 30, 2013. Two and a half years after the Fukushima Daiichi plant belched plumes of radioactive materials over northeast Japan, the almost 83,000 refugees evacuated from the worst-hit areas are still unable to go home. (Photo: Tomas Munita / The New York Times)

Truthout depends on you to continue producing grassroots journalism and disseminating conscientious visions for a brighter future. Contribute now by clicking here!

The story of Fukushima should be on the front pages of every newspaper. Instead, it is rarely mentioned. The problems at Fukushima are unprecedented in human experience and involve a high risk of radiation events larger than any that the global community has ever experienced. It is going to take the best engineering minds in the world to solve these problems and to diminish their global impact.

When we researched the realities of Fukushima in preparation for this article, words like apocalyptic, cataclysmic and Earth-threatening came to mind. But, when we say such things, people react as if we were the little red hen screaming "the sky is falling" and the reports are ignored. So, we’re going to present what is known in this article and you can decide whether we are facing a potentially cataclysmic event.

Also see: Radioactive Rainwater Overwhelms Fukushima Nuclear Plant

Either way, it is clear that the problems at Fukushima demand that the world’s best nuclear engineers and other experts advise and assist in the efforts to solve them. Nuclear engineer Arnie Gundersen of Fairewinds.org and an international team of scientists created a 15-point plan to address the crises at Fukushima.

A subcommittee of the Green Shadow Cabinet (of which we are members), which includes long-time nuclear activist Harvey Wasserman, is circulating a sign-on letter and a petition calling on the United Nations and Japanese government to put in place the Gundersen et al plan and to provide 24-hour media access to information about the crises at Fukushima. There is also a call for international days of action on the weekend of November 9 and 10. The letter and petitions will be delivered to the UN on November 11 which is both Armistice Day and the 32^nd month anniversary of the earthquake and tsunami that caused the Fukushima nuclear disaster.

The Problems of Fukushima

There are three major problems at Fukushima: (1) Three reactor cores are missing; (2) Radiated water has been leaking from the plant in mass quantities for 2.5 years; and (3) Eleven thousand spent nuclear fuel rods, perhaps the most dangerous things ever created by humans, are stored at the plant and need to be removed, 1,533 of those are in a very precarious and dangerous position. Each of these three could result in dramatic radiation events, unlike any radiation exposure humans have ever experienced.  We’ll discuss them in order, saving the most dangerous for last.

Missing reactor cores:  Since the accident at Fukushima on March 11, 2011, three reactor cores have gone missing.  There was an unprecedented three reactor ‘melt-down.’ These melted cores, called corium lavas, are thought to have passed through the basements of reactor buildings 1, 2 and 3, and to be somewhere in the ground underneath. 

Football Pitch-Sized Batteries Could Change the World of Renewable Energy

2011 saw huge advances in solar, wind and other renewable energy sources, and these advancements will continue into 2012. In fact 2012 could be the year that renewable energy sources start to seriously compete with traditional fossil fuels, at least that is the hope in the battle to reduce carbon emissions and our dependence on dwindling oil stocks. However a major problem with renewable energy sources is that they can rarely provide consistent power levels, due to a myriad of factors outside of human control.

Eric Wesoff, an industry analyst with Greentech Media, explains that, “A wind farm only works when the blades are spinning. It might have a nameplate capacity of 100 megawatts, but it never puts out that much. Sometimes it’s 70; sometimes it’s nothing. To a grid operator, that kind of resource is a headache rather than an aspirin.” To overcome these fluctuations energy storage systems can be used to store excess power at peak generating times and release it when needed to provide a more constant level. “So now that 100-MW wind farm can say, ‘We’re a 40-MW, steady-state, 24/7 energy source’-more like a coal plant. That’s more valuable to society.”

The most abundant energy storage system in use around the world is the battery, but producing giant batteries for the electrical grid has always been very expensive. Lots of research has been done into small batteries for mobile phones and MP3 players, etc. and now, according to Haresh Kamath, program manager for energy-storage research at the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). “The research applied to those industries is now being applied to batteries for the grid.” In fact the world’s largest battery array, a $500 million system capable of storing 36 megawatt-hours of electricity, has recently been completed in China by the State Grid Corporation of China (SGCC) and the electric car maker BYD. As part of China’s push toward a smart grid system for renewable energy, the battery has been hooked up to 140 megawatts of solar and wind power generation as well as a smart grid transmission system. And we can expect more of these battery facilities after the Deputy Director of China’s National Energy Administration called it the model for the future of Chinese renewable energy development.

As one of the first large battery systems for grid-level energy storage it will prove an intriguing test-bed for the rest of the world to watch and learn from. However we could also have a new, bigger example to study in a few years after Rubenius, the Dubai-based company, finalised plans to build an unprecedented energy-storage facility in Mexicali. Being positioned near the border it will help improve the reliability of both the US and Mexican grids, paving the way for more solar and wind power in both countries.

Nuclear Power: The Energy of Protest. The Future could be Renewable

With an increasing global population, many wonder just how future energy needs can be met. While wind, tidal and solar energy are posited as being cleaner and sustainable when compared with fossil fuels, certain countries have opted for nuclear power as the solution to their energy needs.

Fukushima has however raised concerns about the safety of nuclear power and has served to place the nuclear industry on the back foot. Moreover, when government costs, the impact of uranium mining and the issue of long-term nuclear waste storage are factored in, the industry isn’t as cheap, energy efficient, sustainable, environmentally friendly or as safe as is often claimed.

Of course, there is also thorny issue of the link between nuclear power and nuclear weapons. Any number of Chernobyls or Fukushimas pale into insignificance when placed alongside the potential danger of nuclear terrorism or arms proliferation.

The late French environmentalist Jacques Cousteau once said that human society is too diverse, national passion too strong and human aggressiveness too deep seated for the peaceful atom and the warlike atom to stay divorced for too long. Countries with nuclear technology and know-how all have the potential to embark on a weapons development programme. At present, there are 21 countries using nuclear energy.

A major challenge to nuclear proliferation controls has been the spread of uranium enrichment technology. The question arises as to whether it is possible to adequately oversee a civil nuclear energy programme in order to prevent the diversion of plutonium to nuclear weapons.

Article Two of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) states that the Agency shall seek to enlarge its contribution to peace throughout the world and that it shall ensure that assistance is provided by it to prevent atomic energy from being used for military purpose. Article Four of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) reaffirms the inalienable right to develop the peaceful use of nuclear technology and pledges to facilitate trade with this in mind. Both bodies seek to promote the development of peaceful nuclear power, while at the same time trying to stop the spread of nuclear weapons.

Nuclear weapons parties to the NPT — US, Britain, France, Russia and China — are prohibited from transferring nuclear weapons or associated technology to non-nuclear states, but can provide technologies for civilian nuclear activities. In return, the non-nuclear states agree not to seek nuclear weapons and to accept ‘safeguards’ on their civilian nuclear materials.

Replacing Fossil Fuel and Nuclear Power with Renewable Energy: Wind, Solar and Hydro Power

 It’s a MYTH that We Need Fossil Fuel Or Nuclear

The big oil, gas, coal and nuclear companies claim that we need those energy sources in order to power America.

Good news: it’s a myth.

Mark Diesendorf – Associate Professor and Deputy Director, Institute of Environmental Studies, UNSW at the University of New South Wales – notes:

The deniers and scoffers repeatedly utter the simplistic myth that renewable energy is intermittent and therefore cannot generate base-load (that is, 24-hour) power.

Detailed computer simulations, backed up with actual experience with wind power overseas, show that the scoffers are wrong. Several countries, including Australia with its huge renewable energy resources, could make the necessary transition to an electricity generation system comprising 100 per cent renewable energy over a few decades.

***

Feasibility has been established by computer simulations of electricity generation systems by several research groups around the world, including my own …

Diesendorf gave an update earlier this month:

Ben Elliston, Iain MacGill and I have performed thousands of computer simulations of 100% renewable electricity in the National Electricity Market(NEM), using actual hourly data on electricity demand, wind and solar power for 2010.

Our latest research, available here and reported here, finds that generating systems comprising a mix of different commercially available renewable energy technologies, located on geographically dispersed sites, do not need base load power stations to achieve the same reliability as fossil-fuelled systems.

The old myth was based on the incorrect assumption that base load demand can only be supplied by base load power stations; for example, coal in Australia and nuclear in France. However, the mix of renewable energy technologies in our computer model, which has no base load power stations, easily supplies base load demand.

I BEG TO DIFFER Mr PRESIDENT

The President of India, Sh Pranab Mukherjee during his address to the nation on the eve of 65th Republic day greeted the nation and talked about the the murky state of affairs engulfing the Indian nation as a result of fractured mandates in elections and the economic crisis India along with the rest of the world is facing these years. His observations on corruption and hypocrisy finding place in his address to the nation only show how deep these maladies are in the Indian system of politics and governance.

"Corruption is a cancer that erodes democracy, and weakens the foundations of our state. If Indians are enraged, it is because they are witnessing corruption and waste of national resources. If governments do not remove these flaws, voters will remove governments." 

Corruption mitigation and good governance can be the biggest growth engines for Indian economy and cannot be allowed to be ignored by any government.Strange is the coincidence that he too like all members of the ruling combine thinks in terms of voters removing these governments whereas the only logical answer to corruption mitigation is to punish all such offenders legally in a quickest possible time.

"Equally dangerous is the rise of hypocrisy in public life. Elections do not give any person the licence to flirt with illusions. Those who seek the trust of voters must promise only what is possible. Government is not a charity shop. Populist anarchy cannot be a substitute for governance. False promises lead to disillusionment, which gives birth to rage, and that rage has one legitimate target: those in power."

Government is certainly not a charity shop but for all these years, our leaders have been deriving their prowess to win elections and rule this country through doles, freebies and subsidies.Mr. President you were also wedded to such practices when you were in active politics.Or is it that such practices are in the best interests of the citizenry when the established parties dabble in them and if a new player steals the thunder from under the feet of the established players, government becomes a charity shop. And lastly are we to understand that corruption cannot be routed and hence no one should make this promise. 

PERFECT RECIPE FOR BEING A SUCCESSFUL POLITICIAN IN INDIA

The Lok Sabha elections 2014 are a few months away and the total Indian polity is on full view at its best worst.At my age I have been a witness to all the general elections of independent India. As far as I recall, the first three elections witnessed some element of sacrifice and service to the nation ( nation implying both, the country and its people at large ) amongst the members who chose public life as a profession. As the years rolled by in the history of independent India, men with a taint of being corruptible at the very first opportunity started flocking in the glamorous world of politics. To start with these people will succumb to baser instinct of lust for power. It was tolerable though neither desirable nor acceptable.With passage of time, the other baser instincts of man, like wine, woman and money gained ascendancy over all the virtues of life and the members of polity started becoming a abhorred class for the silent majority of hapless sufferers of Indian citizenry.

It is not just for nothing that India still remains one of the poorest countries on this globe. The politicians howsoever hard they may shout about the progress made in sixty five years of independence cannot hide the basic fact that more than seventy five percent of population still needs to be provided almost free rations, rations not to give them a wholesome meal but to keep them breathing and existing as per medical terminology. In fact one keeps on wondering if India is progressing or regressing.

In this scenario of reality, a new perfect recipe for being a successful politician in India has been evolved and salient features of this recipe are as under:

• Hone your skills to fool the masses by talking big, idealistic and talking in terms of solutions that may take ages to fructify.
• Forget the country and its citizenry, think about yourself and yourself alone in all your deeds.
• Never forget the old adage " Money makes the mare go ". So concentrate fully on gathering money for self, your near and dear ones, your stooges and cronies.
• Natural resources and national wealth are meant to be plundered by mighty and powerful of the system. Let it happen unabashedly, for this plunder is the mainstay of party coffers and election funding which in turn are mainstay of your existence.
• To cover up your own misdeeds, allow everyone in the state machinery to have a share of loot through corruption, graft and bribe.
• And finally to ensure that the legal process never catches up with the offenders allow it remain painfully slow so that by the time law manages to take its course after a few decades, no evidence can remain fool proof or by that time the offender has bid good bye to this world after enjoying the fruits of his offence.
• And lastly, always look concerned and caring for the plight of the nation and its citizenry but manipulate showing helplessness because of your political adversaries.

France struggles to cut down on nuclear power

By Rob BroombyBBC News, Paris

Continue reading the main story

The Fukushima disaster led many countries to rethink their view on nuclear energy. Germany plans to abandon it altogether, but French President Francois Hollande also wants to cut nuclear output sharply - by a third in 20 years. It's a big ask in a country that now relies on nuclear for 75% of its electricity.

If fully implemented, the pledge would force the closure of up to 20 of the country's 58 reactors according to Professor Laurence Tubiana a former government adviser who the president asked to facilitate a national debate, paving the way for what they call la transition energetique.

This would be a huge step, but Tubiana describes it as a "logical evolution".

France realised that Japan had survived economically when all its atomic power stations were shut down because of its diverse energy mix. In Japan, before the disaster, nuclear power delivered about 30% of the country's electricity, but France is hugely dependent not only on nuclear, but on a single generation of nuclear power stations.

It is vulnerable to a "generic risk", according to Tubiana, where a problem with one reactor could force them all offline for the fault to be fixed. This would cause chaos.

She says the 20 reactors closed in the "transition" could be replaced by renewable energy, which she says would maintain French energy independence and be both "stable and secure".

So far, however, the government has only earmarked one power station for closure - the ageing plant at Fessenheim on the German border - which prompts some to question the government's commitment to Hollande's promise.

The Fukushima disaster prompted Germany to plan the closure of its nuclear power plants by 2022

There is evidently reluctance in cabinet. Industry Minister Arnaud Montebourg is on record as saying that Fessenheim will be the only nuclear power station to close.

On a visit to China in December he reassured his audience that nuclear energy was a "sector of the future" and would continue to contribute "at least 50%" of France's electricity output.

Another member of Hollande's Socialist Party, the MP Christian Bataille, says the plan to curb nuclear was hatched as a way of securing the backing of his Green coalition partners in parliament.

He describes nuclear power as the country's "only national energy source".