GERMANY IS NOT GOING TO DUMP ITS NUCLEAR! It is easy to talk about it now, since that country is still comparatively prosperous, but when the reality of higher energy prices is presented to German voters, they will get the message.

Less than a year ago Merkel was running around shouting about the need for more nuclear, but when she realized that by doing so she was risking her politicak career, she joined the anti-nuclear booster club. The naive voters and probably politicians in countries adjacent to Germany do not seem to understand, so perhaps this is the place to explain it to them. Wind and solar will not do what many voters have been told that they can do, and so Germany will buy power from other countries. That means that nice people like myself will end up being punished to buy Merkel another three or four years in the limelight.

An important Belgium gentleman told a conference I attended that if Germany tries to realize Merkel's foolishness, in five years Belgium might have to ration electricity. Of course, as I pointed out, in five years Belgium can construct the largest nuclear facility in the world, and pass a law which says that Germany does not have access to its output.

Yes, the bottom line is still nuclear plus renewables and alternatives, but what is being considered in Germany at the present time is dumber than stupid.

Chancellor Merkel's stand opens the door to import hydroelectric power and geothermal power via undersea power cable from Iceland. There are 2-groups of islands along the route of the proposed cable, where it may be possible to build seawater-cooled nuclear power stations that sell electric power to Germany and desalinated seawater to other customers.

Conclusion: Goebbels was right when he said that the bigger the lie, the harder (a majority of) the people will try to believe it.

As for renewable energy, it's really too expensive as well as unreliable and sooner, rather than later, the extra burden on the increasingly fragile European economies will be too much to bear. Spain provides a pretty good example, as subsidies for renewable energy are being heaved over the side (the lads are running out of other people’s money) as the Spanish economy takes on more and more water.

From the point of view of the US, I think Europe’s self-inflicted plight is great; our competition is pricing itself out of the global marketplace. We, on the other hand, have ample supplies of natural gas, with the “green agenda” starting down the road to economic reality. By that I mean, if “green energy” can not compete, then it fades out of the marketplace. I think nuclear power in the US faces a similar fate unless costs can be significantly reduced.

In closing, the whole idea of "zero" carbon is inane on many levels, from economics to the climate as a whole. Try as they might to avoid it, reality is simply going to overwhelm those pushing the green religion. Unfortunately, large segments of the population will end up paying the economic price for fundamentally stupid policies promulgated by politicians and their cronies lining their pockets at everyone else’s expense.

P.S. Perhaps some missed this, but a number of the German nuclear units were brought back on-line during the recent cold snap.

When they had a discussion of this topic on TV in Sweden a couple of months ago, a man who is professor of physics and a staunch believer in nuclear could hardly get his pro-nuclear sympathies out of his mouth.

Where the reduction of nuclear costs in the US are concerned, this is not only possible, but there should be people in the US Energy Department who can provide the information we need. Unfortunately however, Dr Chu is as incompetent as his president, so I dont think that we will get much help from him and his foot soldiers.

As for Obama, he is not only incompetent, but corrupt to boot. Just about every policy he has created is taken from the "big government" playbook, with end result of visiting economic ruin on the average American. What is more, the goal of most of the policies is to pay back his contributors, with the ultimate aim of getting re-elected, thereby increasing his (and his followers) wealth and power. While that is always an element of just about any political operation, Obama has taken it to an extreme that is severely damaging the future of the country.

I keep saying that he is incompetent because he hasn't done what I want him to do: end those stupid wars, and put the money wasted in them into the kind of educational system that I want and the US needs - and here I am NOT talking about universities. Aside from that, I also think that Romney is better for the US than Mr Obama - a lot better in fact - and this time I think/hope that the American voters might get the message.

The thing I especially can't stand about Mr Obama however - and please note my language - is that he makes the kind of mistakes that an intelligent man should not make. For instance, what or who gave him the idea that Dr Chu knew what he should know? People tell me that if he gets four more years, he will straighten up and fly right. That is something like expecting George W. Bush to stop ruining the American economy with his nonsense - and not just the American economy. Most of us except the rich are in trouble because of George. and that includes yours truly.

I'd love to have another description for Mr O.,and I also know that the American voters might supply us with another bungler, but assuming that the Republicans can find somebody to run who can add two plus two, then I think that we can dispense with our president. But please note: I was afraid that the race thing might work against Obama, but fortunately it didn't. What I am afraid of now is that it might work for him, because that soap opera showing him sitting in the White House situation room waiting for the denouement of the Bin Laden episode was about the saddest thing that I could imagine an American president doing.

As for the position of the government in all this, it is their job to make sure or try to make sure that if or when the (aggregate) oil price goes up by another twenty dollars, we will not have to experience another macroeconomic melt-down. This is what the voters and non-voters want their government to do, although they may not be aware of it. AND THE GOVERNMENT PLAYS A CRUCIAL ROLE HERE, JUST AS THEY DID IN WW2. Where the oil price is concerned - which is a tax on all of us - OPEC is in the drivers seat, and only the government - or a consortium of governments - can do something about it.

You say that Obama is corrupt. Maybe he is and maybe he isn't, but I doubt it. He is just plain incompetent. He doesn't have the right reflexes for that job. If they had wanted a president from Chicago, and Al Capone had still been alive, he would have been a better choice. As for the corrupt people, those are the millionaires dreaming about becoming billionaires instead of making the US what it could and should be.

As they say in China and Japan.

Rots of ruck.

Fred Banks finally says something in a few number of words!!!

http://www.prosefights.org/coal/turbinecoal/turbinecoal.htm#ronqu estion1

So many failures in such a short time - when was it, 1870? (That’s when my grandparents were being born) they became a country. In the 30’s they were perhaps the best educated and most sophisticated country on earth.

The German economy is strong enough now to purchase electricity from the surrounding countries when or if they close the German nuclear facilities. IThe strong get stronger although they may lose their charms in the end. In the world that I would like to see or manage, I would let the Germans dump their nuclear, and then prohibit most or all of the electric exports to them. That may not change their mind about nuclear, but it would depress the ruinous electric prices we often have to deal with in this country.

So she still is supporting nuclear power (in France) has lost no jobs (in Germany) keeps the competitive edge because French nuclear power is still relatively inexpensive AND she makes it APPEAR like she is pro-environment by appearing to shutdown nuclear industry in Germany. It is actually quite brilliant. She is of course a complete liar and a hypocrite but she is a politician after all.

Once Fukushima fades from the headlines and the amount of spare capacity France has to sell decreases she will start them all up again....just as Japan will do.

Malcolm

Bringing Geothermal Power from Iceland to Germany - you gotta be nuts. That project would cost trillions. Laying undersea power cable is a very very expensive business. They would have to be DC links as plopping 500 kV lines under the sea would pose massive problems.....there is a reason why 500 kV lines are high up in the air. Air is an insulator seawater is a conductor - a very good one. It is not quite as simple as drawing a straight line between a couple of islands on a map the the earth. The line losses alone would be staggering. You need to rethink that idea.

Not sure what you were saying about seawater cooled plants in Japan...they are ALL seawater cooled and they are ALL on the coast for that very reason. I had the opportunity to visit Takahama Nuclear plant some years ago. Very well run plant.

As noted the Japanese will find that the cost of importing oil coal and LNG will destroy their economy and like Germany will restart all their nuclear plants. Merkel is awaiting a recession that will inevitably hit Germany as her opportunity to start up the nuclear plants again.

Malcolm

The grid in Europe already is a highly integrated system. That is what is keeping the lights on in Germany. If you think it is a few windmills and a few solar panels running German industry - give your head a shake - twice.

If the wind power business in Europe is so good how come Vestas in Denmark is laying off thousands and going broke? Using gas turbines and diesel generators will keep Germany dependent on Russian oil and gas supplies. Great for Gazprom stupid politics for Germany. And storage systems - where? This notion of a 100% carbon free electrical system can only be accomplished with nuclear power. Nothing else comes close to being able to do it. For the last 40 years all I have heard of is these great technological breakthroughs in battery and other technologies that are "just around the corner" ready to transform the electricity business and here we are 40 years later using the same technology we always have - because it works.

As for wind and solar power - it only works economically when subsidized by government and if you dig into the financial woes of Spain and Portugal you will see that billions of dollars of borrowed money have gone into idiotic power schemes that are not financially viable. These subsidies are - as someone noted above - being ditched overboard as the economic realities of life start to hit home hard in these countries.

Should Merkel not be lying to her population and leaves German nuclear plants off line for an extended period you will see the German industrial machine stopped in its tracks and it's products becoming increasingly expensive and uncompetitive.

The German people - as pragmatic as they are will sooner have nuclear power than a third world standard of living like they are trying to impose on Greece.

Malcolm

Malcolm

Apparently German people do not want to freeze to death. Just cannot imagine why. I wonder if GreenPeace is distributing blankets? Did not hear that as headline news on the media did we? Do you think the media is a tad biased against nuclear. I think it is now fully self evident.

Where are all the global warming pundits in Europe now? Wasn't is supposed to be getting warmer??

Or does global warming mean it is getting colder. Oh - I forgot - it's climate CHANGE now not global warming so that means we can blame all cold spells and all warm spells and all normal spells on CO2. Any weather pattern at any time in the future is now due to CO2.

I get it now - we can blame EVERYTHING on Global warming - even the need to start up dangerous German Reactors. Or did the cold weather suddenly make them more safe. Yes that is it. Cold weather makes nuclear reactors in Germany safer so they can be started up. That has to be good for a Government funded research program.

Malcolm

They have no choice, and the Japanese people are intelligent enough to get the message - now or later. I have some doubts about the people who own that country however. The last time I was in Japan I was told that regardless of what students and teachers in general thought, Tokyo University is still the only university that counts if you want to buy into the Japanese ruling clique.

What I do absolutely believe though is that no more mistakes will be made in the location, construction, management or regulation of nuclear facilities.

On solar generation, solar thermal with thermal storage in many areas would be competitive now AFTER the efficiencies and improvements gained by building an initial 8 GW (see Sargent & Lundy engineering study). That first 8 GW needs to be done rapidly enough to exploit the advantages of volume manufacturing, and it needs to be subsidized because the first 8 GW will not be cheaper than competitors (especially N Gas at these prices. Suspicious?) and therefore private capital can't build it. After the economies of scale develop with the first 8 GW THEN solar thermal will compete on the market with any other fuel, and will provide increasing reliable baseload generation, with small amounts of N Gas backup, as the prices drop. That's how we should be doing things, gets us weaned off polluting our grandchildrens planet and leaves some fossil fuels for future generations.

But then, these things will NEVER get past entrenced interests of the wealthy.

According to figures released by a University of Michigan study, the water consumption for parabolic trough, wet cooling, solar thermal is around 1000 gallons per MWh. Scaled to 8 GW is 192 million gallons per day, or 7 billion gallons per year. I think that means finding a couple more Colorado Rivers out there in the desert southwest somewhere. …or maybe we could pipe water down from Canada at a bargain price.

http://webservices.itcs.umich.edu/drupal/recd/?q=node/140 see also: http://www.solarthermalworld.org/node/644

Oh but I keep forgetting how the religiously anti-solar fossil fuel supplier crowd refuse to support anything which actually has a chance to support society until every last ounce of fossil fuel is gone.

Acquasol project - Australia

SOLAR THERMAL POWER GENERATION AND SEA WATER DESALINATION -- Stephen Kaneff -- Energy Research Centre, The Australian National University/ ANUTECH, Canberra A.C.T. Australia 0200

"Economic aspects are becoming favourable for the use of large dish-based systems, especially if associated with desalination."

1. It snows. Who will clear the snow from solar panels. 2. Last night here we had a typical sloppy wet ice mixed with snow storm. All the solar panels are covered in wet sticky snow and ice. Their output is zero. 3. We have short days in winter.

The onus is on you to come up with the data support a nut case idea that solar panels in Canada produce more energy than is used in their manufacture. I maintain that they do not. I do know that nuclear DOES work day in day out and I see first hand solar and wind often NOT working.

Malcolm

"In summary, for example, the conversion efficiency to produce steam at 500°C and pressure of 5 MPa, for insolation in the range 400 to 1100 W/m2, is about 90% (steam enthalpy at ground level to direct beam input) for a collector with clean mirrors"

Note CLEAN MIRRORS. As soon as they start to get dirty the efficiency drops like a stone. What makes them dirty in Australia.....sand and dust storms in the desert for one. They get covered in red dust. Everything in the desert is covered in the stuff. It gets everywhere. When I was there last year there were major forest fires in the Southern part of Western Australia. Any solar array would have been covered in soot. With thousands upon thousands of these mirrors who would get the job of cleaning them? The highly abrasive dust dust would wreck any mirrored surface in weeks - especially when blown around by the wind.

This article has not only convinced me that these systems will not work in Canada it also convinces me they will not work in hot countries. Great in theory but in practice it is a complete bust.

France has one of the installations described here which they built in the 70's. It seems that nuclear is a better choice for them. They did not build hundreds of these installations they built 50 nuclear plants instead.

I am concerned that your faith in solar is based on pure theory not on the necessary practicality of operation.

It reminds me of one of Alexander "Kingdom" Brunel's failures when he built an underground system that used a vacuum arrangement to move a train through a tunnel. It worked great on paper and it did work for a while until the rats which populate many underground tunnels in London took a liking to the vacuum sealant which was beeswax - and ate it. End of great engineering achievement.

Even great engineers get it wrong.

Malcolm

b) I don't think that dust / dirt is such a huge problem with the systems as you maintain. Could you provide a reference?