Unavoidable Answer for the Problem of Climate Change [New York Times endorses nuclear power]

New York Times ^ | November 19, 2013 | EDUARDO PORTER

[grundle]

How will the world replace fossil fuels? Can it be done fast enough, cheaply enough and on a sufficient scale without nuclear energy? For all the optimism about the prospects of wind, sun and tides to power our future, the evidence suggests the answer is no.

Scrambling to find an alternative fuel to generate some 30 percent of its power, Japan had no choice but to turn to coal and gas. A few years ago, it promised that in 2020 it would produce 25 percent less greenhouse gas emissions than in 1990; last week it said it would, instead, produce 3 percent more.

Japan is unlikely to be the only country to miss its targets. In response to the Fukushima disaster, Germany shut down eight nuclear reactors and said it would close the remaining nine by 2022.

Everybody is promising to fill the gap with renewables. So far, however, coal and natural gas have won out. CO2 emissions in Germany actually increased 1 percent last year, even as they declined in the United States and most of Western Europe.

Between 2010 and 2012, worldwide consumption of nuclear energy shrank 7 percent. Over the same period, the consumption of coal, the dirtiest fuel and the worst global warming offender, rose 4.5 percent. Data released on Tuesday by the Global Carbon Project confirmed that coal accounted for over half the growth in fossil fuel emissions in 2012.

With energy consumption expected to grow by more than half over the next 30 years, the odds seem low that the world can avoid catastrophic warming without carbon-free nuclear power.

[Leto]

Well what has happened is that Leading Climate alarmist and Gore heroes like James Hansen have declared that Wind and Solar can’t replace fossil fuels so they have endorsed Nukes, so the sheep at the times follow along.

Hansen like a broken clock is right twice a day and wrong the rest of the time:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/03/world/nuclear-energy-climate-change-scientists-letter/index.html

[Sioux-san]

I agree - also want a moratorium on these awful wind turbines that are messing up the countryside and killing off birds & bats at an alarming rate - the power isn’t even being used in my state, but is being sent to neighboring Ohio. Ridiculous. Huge footprint for very little power. What a rip. For Michigan, it’s natural gas that should be increased.

[Sioux-san]

Your point? You doubt this research? Russia didn’t and they are doing very well now that they aren’t looking for dead dinosaur remains.

[C210N]

The energy concentration within slimy organic waste fecal matter is tremendous and could power the entire US for years to come.

We should now design and build these modern power plants, and redirect all the output of the NY Slimes to it.

[Revel]

And I predict that apart from divine intervention. It is nuclear power that is going to end human life on earth. For those who have not learned from Japan.. A Darwin award is in order.

[Paradox]

Many of us here have been screaming this for many years. NYT finally has figured this out. _IF_ the greenies are REALLY that concerned with global warming, the Nuclear is the ONLY practical solution (to carbon emissions).

Now, I happen to favor Nuclear for non-green reasons, but hey, if they want to jump on the bandwagon, for whatever reasons, I'll gladly make room.

[Army Air Corps]

I think we have a winner.

[Ditto]

France is the world leader in Nukes I think.

No it isn't. The United States is. We have twice as many nuke plants operating as France. There are currently four new nuclear plants under construction in the United States.

[Chickensoup]

No it isn't. The United States is. We have twice as many nuke plants operating as France. There are currently four new nuclear plants under construction in the United States.

____________________

But I think that France has built many more world wide than we have and have updated their technology while we were laying off physicists in the 80’s.

[Ditto]

But I think that France has built many more world wide than we have and have updated their technology while we were laying off physicists in the 80’s.

Again, not true. Approximately half of all the Nuclear Plants in the world are Westinghouse designs. Add in General Electric designs, and nearly 70% of nuclear plants around whe world are US designed plants.

The most modern design that has been approved world-wide is the Westinghouse AP 1000. Westinghouse is currently building four of them in the US and another four in China with 6 more under option there.