MsMilkytheclown1
Published on Sep 5, 2013
Today
we feature an interview with Amory Lovins, preeminent environmental
thinker and co-founder of the Rocky Mountain Institute. With forty years
of energy policy experience, Amory Lovins has dedicated himself to the
idea that our energy future does not have to look like our energy past.
Listen in as Arnie and Amory discuss transitioning towards a clean
energy economy in the US and around the world.
The Road Less Taken: Energy Choices for the Future
http://tinyurl.com/mwrn6jn
The Rocky Mountain Institute
http://www.rmi.org/
Reinventing Fire: Bold Business Solutions for the New Energy Era by Amory Lovins, 2011.
http://tinyurl.com/mzj33sr
AG:
Just in the last 8 months, we've had an enormous change in the nuclear
industry. We started the year with 104 nuclear power plants and now
we're down to 99. We lost the Kewanee plant, Crystal River 3, San Onofre
2 and 3 and just last week the Vermont Yankee plant announced that it
was shutting down.
AL: Quite a few nuclear plants are starting to
shut down because they, too, are uneconomic to operate. They can't
compete with the wholesale power price and that's regardless of what
they may have cost to build originally. Because that cost is already
sunk and you cant un-spend it. And anyway, it's probably paid off by now
because the plants are old. And I just wrote a piece in the April,
2013, The Atomic Scientist about the economics of U.S. nuclear
phase-out, and we're in one. It's kind of in slow motion but any nuclear
plant that has big repair bills like Crystal River or San Onofre stands
a good chance of shutting down, and it's kind of like having the engine
blow up in your car and it's an old car and you've got to figure out,
is it worth putting in a whole new engine and betting that something
else important isn't going to break during the time you wanted to get
the benefit out of the new engine. And it's a pretty hard bet to make
because as these plants get old, stuff starts to wear out, you get
fatigue and corrosion and all kinds of age-dependent effects, there has
been a very rapid escalation in the real cost of big maintenance jobs on
these plants, what are called net capital additions, because they're
actually added to the capital cost rather than expensed. And the
industry has been pretty careful not to find out whether that escalation
is mostly for upgrading to produce more power -- whether it's a
productive investment -- or whether it's more and more big repairs
caused by aging effects. That would be very bad news for those who have
just gotten their licenses extended or are about to, to go into 20 years
of overtime, because it would mean that your license lets you run the
plant, but it's not worth continuing to fix it. And I think there is
some evidence emerging that for many plants, that will be the case.
AG:
The New York Times, Matt Wald ran a story saying that the economics of
these plants is marginal right now. And it's especially true with the
single-unit plants because they don't have a second unit to average out
the labor costs and it's especially true because all these plants are
now pushing 40 years. The net effect is that as soon as there's a
problem, management's going to pull the plug and shut the plant down.
The cost to keep your staff fed for the half-year or year to make a
major repair can never be amortized in addition to the cost of the
repair over 20 more years to the plant site.
AL: Yeah. This is
very different, of course, from the situation with modular renewables.
If you had a gearbox break on a wind machine or an inverter break on a
photovoltaic plant, it's a matter of typically days to weeks to get the
new one in and you just plug it in and keep going. You don't have to
worry about radioactivity. It really isn't a difficult repair -- a
standard industrial repair. And it only affects one unit at a time. It's
at most a few megawatts, it's not 1,000 megawatts.
AG: The big
issue here is how do we want our power to be generated 50 years from
now. Do we want it to be large central stations controlled by larger
corporations? Or do we want people-powered renewable energy? That battle
was fought 100 years ago and the big corporations won. Well, with the
invention of computers and distributed generation, solar power and
windmills, we've been able to turn the tide and it's time now for people
to get back involved in energy production.
AL: In fact, the
biggest game changer is that instead of having to build a cathedral like
project for a decade for billions of dollars, in that time and for
roughly that money, you can now build each year during your big plant
construction period a solar manufacturing plant, which then each year
thereafter will produce enough solar cells that each year thereafter
they can produce as much electricity as your big plant would have
produced. So the scaling can be incredibly rapid (...)
***********************************************
Amory Lovins: A 40-year plan for energy
TED
Published on May 1, 2012
http://www.ted.com
In this intimate talk filmed at TED's offices, energy theorist Amory
Lovins lays out the steps we must take to end the world's dependence on
oil (before we run out). Some changes are already happening -- like
lighter-weight cars and smarter trucks -- but some require a bigger
vision.
TEDTalks is a daily video podcast of the best talks and
performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers
and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes. Featured speakers
have included Al Gore on climate change, Philippe Starck on design,
Jill Bolte Taylor on observing her own stroke, Nicholas Negroponte on
One Laptop per Child, Jane Goodall on chimpanzees, Bill Gates on malaria
and mosquitoes, Pattie Maes on the "Sixth Sense" wearable tech, and
"Lost" producer JJ Abrams on the allure of mystery. TED stands for
Technology, Entertainment, Design, and TEDTalks cover these topics as
well as science, business, development and the arts.
Closed captions and
translated subtitles in a variety of languages are now available on
TED.com, at
http://www.ted.com/translate
***********************************************
Just say no to nuclear power – from Fukushima to Vermont
Fukushima showed us the intolerable costs of nuclear power. The citizens of Vermont show us the benefits of shutting it down
A plum of smoke rises moments after a hydrogen explosion at Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power complex. Photograph: Reuters
Welcome to the nuclear renaissance.
Entergy Corp, one of the largest nuclear-power producers in the US, issued a surprise
press release Tuesday, saying it plans "to close and decommission its Vermont Yankee
Nuclear Power
Station in Vernon, Vermont. The station is expected to cease power
production after its current fuel cycle and move to safe shutdown in the
fourth quarter of 2014." Although the press release came from the
corporation, it was years of people's protests and state legislative
action that forced its closure. At the same time that activists
celebrate this key defeat of nuclear power, officials in
Japan admitted that radioactive leaks from the
Fukushima Daiichi nuclear catastrophe are far worse than previously acknowledged.
"It
took three years, but it was citizen pressure that got the state Senate
to such a position", nuclear-energy consultant Arnie Gundersen told me
of Entergy's announcement. He has coordinated projects at 70 nuclear
plants around the country and now provides independent testimony on
nuclear and radiation issues. He explained how the state of Vermont, in
the first such action in the country, had banned the plant from
operating beyond its original 40-year permit. Entergy was seeking a
20-year extension.
Read More Here
***********************************************
