French group to help Japan dismantle nuclear reactors

Areva's role in Japan will now be to participate in preliminary studies for dismantling boiling-water reactors
Areva's role in Japan will now be to participate in preliminary studies for dismantling boiling-water reactors

French nuclear giant Areva said Thursday it had linked up with Hitachi GE Nuclear Energy to help Japan dismantle boiling-water nuclear power stations.

Following a massive accident at the Fukushima reactor, hit by a tsunami in 2011, Japan said it would shut down 11 nuclear reactors, although it has put two back on stream this year.

Areva was involved in the Fukushima clean-up, but that reactor is not covered by the new agreement, the French group said in a statement. It has been working with Hitachi to improve Japanese reactors' safety for the past two years.

Areva's role will now be to participate in preliminary studies for dismantling boiling-water reactors.

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's government has been pushing for a return to nuclear to generate electricity after Japan's several dozen went offline in the wake of the 2011 disaster.

The resource-poor nation's energy bill has soared since it was forced to turn to fossil-fuel imports to plug the gap.

But the Japanese public remains wary of atomic power, and Abe's push has prompted rare protests and damaged his popularity.


Explore further

Japan court upholds nuclear power plant injunction

© 2015 AFP

Citation: French group to help Japan dismantle nuclear reactors (2015, November 26) retrieved 24 October 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2015-11-french-group-japan-dismantle-nuclear.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
51 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Nov 27, 2015
This should make for a very interesting decade, as they slowly realize the disaster we created in our hubris and greed. They cannot even view the masses of Corium, the molten blobs of former fuel and reactor vessel, because of the intense radiation, which even kills the vision equipment.

Meanwhile, we have 22 sites with shut down reactors, but which contain high-level waste, still exothermic and dangerous:

(http://www.boston...ry.html)

Who is going to pay for the guards for 240,000 years, or ten half-lives of Plutonium?


Nov 27, 2015
intense radiation, which even kills the vision equipment
pathological fear-monger on duty.
high-level waste
Nuclear waste is not problem at all. France generates most of their electricity from nuclear power and no problems with waste there. Aside they have one of the cheapest electricity in Europe that does not kill millions birds and bats neither ruin natural landscapes as wind/solar does.

Nov 29, 2015
The article reports the lesser problems with this waste. Willie thinks there are none at all. Maybe he should volunteer to take it.

Willie, call WIPP.

Meanwhile, since nobody can even view the intensely-radioactive Fukushima Corium, this ought to be interesting.

Nov 29, 2015
"tilting" towards renewables.
"Germany's electricity prices are already double those in the U.S. and France." - Nov 25, 2015
"The price of going green keeps rising. No one knows for sure how much rewiring Europe's economic engine will cost in the end, just that it will be a fortune."
"Using current energy market parameters as as benchmark, the total price tag for Energiewende would likely be about €1.1 trillion"
"Those market forces have pushed wholesale price for a kilowatt-hour of electricity in Germany to less than 3 cents. The price guarantee for power from a wind turbine or solar installation is usually a multiple of that."
"Meanwhile, countries such as the U.K., and even Japan, continue to see a future for nuclear power."
http://www.politi...r-shock/

Nov 29, 2015
nobody can even view the intensely-radioactive..
Only "smart special" people, like gskam, that can see "The Emperor's New Clothes", or believe in unicorns/mermaids, are able to view it.

Nov 29, 2015
Go try, Willie. In some places out of the reactor buildings you can get a lethal dose in tens of minutes.

Nov 29, 2015
In some places out of the reactor buildings you can get a lethal dose in tens of minutes.
"..radiation levels were not high enough to be detected by a dosimeter used during the session."
"According to Tomihara and other radiation experts, radiation levels above the sea are relatively low despite being only 1.5 km from the plant.."
http://ajw.asahi....11100001
Earth's natural radioactivity up to 800mSv/a while nearby Fukushima 20mSv/a.
"The fact of the matter is that most of the area around Fukushima IS perfectly safe. They've cordoned off areas as uninhabitable with a limit of 20 mSv/a that is based on absolutely nothing."
http://www.world-...xposure/

Nov 30, 2015
"we already had a practical plan back in the 1960s to become fully carbon-free without any need of wind or solar: nuclear power."
"If we are serious about replacing fossil fuels, we are going to need nuclear power, so the choice is stark: We can keep on merely talking about a carbon-free world, or we can go ahead and create one."
"..series of bankruptcies and the scandal of Solyndra, the solar panel manufacturer .. after receiving a federal guarantee of hundreds of millions of dollars. Wind and solar together provide less than 2 percent of the world's energy, and they aren't growing anywhere near fast enough to replace fossil fuels."
"nobody in Japan died from radiation, .. "no discernible increased incidence of radiation-related health effects are expected." "
"Chernobyl accident .. was a direct result of both a faulty design and the operators' incompetence."
http://www.nytime...eed.html

Nov 30, 2015
Hi WillieWard. :)

One of your above quotes:
"we already had a practical plan back in the 1960s to become fully carbon-free without any need of wind or solar: nuclear power."
So, why did they keep building new coal power stations if building all-nuclear power stations was so cheap, safe and economically feasible in 'the market place' without establishment/enabling govt subsidies and 'socializing' the subsequent storage/guarding/environmental contamination etc costs down the track?

Also, your argument that design/operation/human failures etc causes nuclear accidents, and the total absence of recognition of the natural/political/proliferation threats from earthquakes/tsunamis/terrorists and 'failed-states', doesn't exactly fill anyone with confidence in nuclear!

And do understand: it's not about 'total cessation' of coal power, but its reduction/phase-out to minimal level as part of overall 'mix' which will evolve as we increase renewable energy/jobs/economy. Ok? :)

Dec 01, 2015
"Nuclear power also prevented about 64 gigatonnes of carbon from being released into the atmosphere between 1971 and 2009. In other words, according to the report, it cut about 15 times more emissions than it has created."
"Fewer than 50 people were reported to have died at Chernobyl; by contrast, the American Lung Association estimates that smoke from coal-fired power plants kills about 13,000 people every year,"
"Coal is so much more dangerous than nuclear it's not funny"
"Scientists are working on cheaper and safer reactor designs that might make it possible to scale up nuclear power. Molten-salt reactors are a leading candidate, since they promise to destroy existing nuclear waste and wouldn't melt down like current fission reactors do"
http://www.techin...-2015-11

Dec 01, 2015
How is Hinkley Point working out
"Nuclear power will save customers money compared with other energy options and provide a huge boost to British industrial strength, jobs and skills both in Britain and abroad," de Rivaz said, adding that the go-ahead for Hinkley was "good news in the fight against climate change".
"The building of the new Hinkley nuclear plant will create 25,000 jobs in construction and provide 1000 jobs in operation. These will be high-quality skilled jobs that will create a positive legacy for major infrastructure projects for the future."
http://www.powere...=kIPjGvO

Dec 02, 2015
power from solar panels will be in 2025? My guess would be around 2 cents Kwh.
sunshine and breeze now almost for free: 2 ¢/kWh (despite of real data showing us the contrary) go to cleantechnica

Dec 02, 2015
show us the real cost of sunshine and wind
"Storing electricity in batteries currently costs $350/kilowatt hour"
http://phys.org/n...day.html
"Electricity from new wind power is nearly four times as expensive as electricity from existing nuclear power plants according to analysis from the Institute for Energy Research."
http://dailycalle...issions/
"..less than 3 cents. The price guarantee for power from a wind turbine or solar installation is usually a multiple of that."
http://www.politi...r-shock/

Dec 02, 2015
Hey, Willie.

Go here:
https://globaleth...9%A1%8C/

In fact, all of you check it out, please.

Dec 02, 2015
Go here:
https://globaleth...9%A1%8C/
In fact, all of you check it out, please.
Except no one has died from radiation, and wind/solar has more linked cases of leukemia/cancer than Fukushima.

Dec 02, 2015
Willie, did you read the article I posted? I'll bet you were too SCARED to read it.

Did you read the article on trying to store intensely-radioactive and exothermic materials in salt? They seem to have a difficult time finding a way to even store this nasty stuff, yet you want to make more?

Dec 02, 2015
I'll bet you were too SCARED to read it.
..intensely-radioactive and exothermic materials..
I'm always in doubt if this fear-monger guy is ignorant, dishonest or both.

Dec 02, 2015
"..Bloomberg New Energy Finance, which predicts the average cost of residential stationary energy storage systems will fall from $1,600 per KWh in 2015 to below $1,000 per KWh in 2020, and $260 per KWh in 2040." - November 11, 2015
http://www.greenb...s-future
http://www.busine...n-future
Nuclear power does not need so much energy storage.

Dec 02, 2015
No, Willie, it needs storage for intensely-radioactive waste for extremely long periods.

Dec 02, 2015
it needs storage
No, gskam, "Nuclear produces tiny amounts of nuclear waste"
"The U.S. nuclear industry generates a total of about 2,000 – 2,300 metric tons of used fuel per year."
"If these used fuel assemblies were stacked end-to-end and side-by-side, they would cover a single football field about eight yards deep"
http://nuclear-ec...1557.jpg
http://nuclear-ec...-summer/

Dec 03, 2015
WillieWard claims
"Nuclear produces tiny amounts of nuclear waste"
Whose definition of tiny & Prove it ?

WillieWard claims
"The U.S. nuclear industry generates a total of about 2,000 – 2,300 metric tons of used fuel per year."
Prove this is the total including aAll tools, infrastructure, irradiated containers etc ?

WillieWard with Great ignorance proves disingenuous
"If these used fuel assemblies were stacked end-to-end and side-by-side, they would cover a single football field about eight yards deep"
Really, no one smart would EVER do such a stoopid thing, worked out ?

1 Heat needing dissipation ?
2 Radioactive gas release ?
3 Increased radionucleotide byproducts from increased reactions, ie meltdowns ?

WillieWard didnt notice in his link
http://nuclear-economics.com/11-nuclear-power-in-summer/
Item 3 WillieWard - what are they going to do with all that irradiated infrastructure ?

Solar & http://htwww.hazergroup.com.au

Clean & Safe

Dec 03, 2015
Hey, Willie, if those used fuel assemblies were "stacked end-to-end and side-by-side", you would be dead.

Dec 03, 2015
what are they going to do with all that irradiated infrastructure
If radiation is a concern what about wind/solar farms that have rare-earth metals with trace of radioactive uranium and thorium.
".. wind turbines, solar panels .. rely on rare-earth metals."
".. carry uranium and thorium, the most radioactive element on the planet, and extracting the metal is typically a long, multistage process involving toxic chemicals."
http://www.livesc...ica.html
http://news.thoma...newables
Solar and wind produce wastes and carcinogenics: gallium arsenide, hexavalent chromium, selenium, brominated diphenylethers, polybrominated biphenyls.
http://www.txses....end-life
https://toryardva...inogens/

Dec 03, 2015
WillieWard claims
If radiation is a concern what about wind/solar farms that have rare-earth metals with trace of radioactive uranium and thorium
The key word here is "Trace" don't you understand quantification AND basic Physics ?

Background radiation is everywhere, have been down this rabbit hole with you before & you FAIL to understand radio-nucleotide Physics in any quantitative sense at all !

What is alpha, beta &/or gamma ray emission flux ?

WillieWard claims
...uranium and thorium, the most radioactive element on the planet
Really - more radioactive than Plutonium or Americium or U 235 - Prove it ?

Anything at all to tell low Alpha emitters of natural uranium & thorium which for the latter are in beach sand on west coast of Australia all over the place are "most radioactive" ?

Your links:
1 Chemical management
2 & 4 see 1
3 not found

You confuse comparative issue of high risk long life radioactive contamination with chemical management issues...

Dec 03, 2015
high risk long life radioactive
If high-risk then short-life; if long-life then low-risk.
"Radionuclides with long half-lives tend to be alpha and beta emitters – making their handling easier – while those with short half-lives tend to emit the more penetrating gamma rays. Eventually all radioactive wastes decay into non-radioactive elements. The more radioactive an isotope is, the faster it decays."
http://www.world-...agement/

fay
Dec 03, 2015
Reality
it's not about 'total cessation' of coal power, but its reduction/phase-out to minimal level
Why is this point so hard for Eikka, Willie, MR166 etc. etc. to grasp?



because energiewende is actually doing the exact opposite and sending electricity cost through the roof in the process.
http://www.econom...nd-blows

Dec 03, 2015
WillieWard Failed when he said
If high-risk then short-life; if long-life then low-risk
Which directly contradicts your claim in your earlier post on this thread, are you completely dimwitted ?

WillieWard Failed to quantify ANY radiation emissions from ANY use of rare earths in renewable energy technologies

WillieWard says
"Radionuclides with long half-lives tend to be alpha and beta emitters..
"Tend" is a minor qualitative term, why can't you quantify it re nuclear vs solar ?

WillieWard says
..The more radioactive an isotope is, the faster it decays
But, over what period - millions of yrs for negligible background radiation for solar/wind vs hundreds of yrs risking places uninhabitable for nuclear ?

Which would you rather have, solar/wind/hydro with radionucleotide's only Alpha emitters & contained within 5cm on a roof at HOME vs nuclear with Beta/Gamma emitters no smart person would have next-door or even adjacent suburb ?

Very simple decision :P

Dec 04, 2015
risking places uninhabitable for nuclear
Nature proves nuclear power is the most ecologically friendly energy source.
"Wildlife thriving around Chernobyl nuclear plant despite radiation"
http://www.thegua...adiation
"wolf abundance is more than 7 times higher,"
http://www.latime...ory.html
http://www.dailym...ter.html
"At Fukushima .. there have also been reports of wild boar thriving in the evacuated area."
http://www.portsm...-7000991
Nuclear power produces the lowest impact in wildlife's habits; it preserves most of the natural landscapes; it is energy dense and compact.

Dec 05, 2015
WillieWard FAILS with the Strangest of all claims ever
risking places uninhabitable for nuclear
Nature proves nuclear power is the most ecologically friendly energy source
"Wildlife thriving around Chernobyl nuclear plant despite radiation"
Really ?

a. Where has nature ever used nuclear power as a friendly energy source ?
b. Over what period ?
c. How was waste handled ?

So when the plant was operating for decades prior to the nuclear disaster did the radiation and occasional emissions encourage or discourage wildlife in the area ?

Which leads to these questions

1. For all the wildlife that's moved into the area since people left after the nuclear disaster, how many animals examined for mutations and where are the reports ?
2. How are all the wildlife tracked ?
3. Is the average lifespan for all the wildlife comparable to humans ?
4. What is the susceptibility of all that wildlife to radiation ?

Why are you unable to answer/focus on earlier questions ?

Dec 05, 2015
"Solar panels .. and wind turbines all require rare earth metals."
"Rare earth elements and metals are often located in rock containing Thorium and Uranium. "
"increasing cases of leukemia and other cancers, and multiple deaths of farm animals in these contaminated areas."
http://raremetals...ent.html
"There are adverse health effects from infrasound on humans and animals."
http://www.argusl...1023775/
"The low-frequency sound and the constant thump-thump have caused some people to abandon their homes located in the vicinity of wind farms."
"Wind Turbines take terrible toll on animals"
http://canadafree...-animals

Dec 06, 2015
WillieWard Fails to answer my questions & can only repeat
"Solar panels .. and wind turbines all require rare earth metals."
"Rare earth elements and metals are often located in rock containing Thorium and Uranium"
So waht ?
These are Alpha emitters, radiation from them is stopped by 5 -10cm in air ie Less than 1/2 an inch !

WillieWard claims
"increasing cases of leukemia and other cancers, and multiple deaths of farm animals in these contaminated areas."
Prove it ?

Whilst at it, tell us about the animals which moved into the Chernobyl area who were exposed to radiation from Cs137 which is HIGHER than Thorium/Uranium, what studies have been done to show those mutation rates ?

WillieWard, you are like so many uneducated that make unsupportable claims, can't understand the details, can't make comparative assessments, ie bias.

Re Wind turbines WillieWard !
Linking mere opinions doesnt help you, if there were a real issue farm animals would be moved, doh !

Dec 06, 2015
radiation from Cs137
"..alpha radiation from naturally occurring Polonium-210 is more damaging to biological tissues than gamma radiation from Cesium-137."
http://www.deepse...isaster/
"Cesium 137, a fission product, can be used to protect blood in blood banks, saving lives of babies and the immuno-deficient."
"If recycled, the waste lifetime is reduced to around 300 years."
http://www.things...ste.html
"Cobalt-60 or Cesium-137 were used to sterilize the syringe, the needle, and possibly even the blood itself."
http://www.things...ste.html
"a solar powered world produces 63,000 times the waste of a nuclear powered world."
http://www.things...ion.html

Dec 06, 2015
Europe's biggest solar farm opens in France...
http://renewecono...ar-31214
Dreadful impact on natural landscape: http://renewecono...x195.jpg
"Solar photovoltaic (PV) facilities require up to 75 times the land area."
http://www.nei.or...t-and-Re
"solar farms .. 10 W/m2 . In contrast, nuclear power .. excess of 100 W/m2, and regularly 1000 W/m2."
https://carboncou...on-musk/
"nuclear power plants have only a tiny footprint and can be placed at many more locations"
http://www.indepe...?id=8539
"nuclear .. it uses less land.."
http://thebreakth...otprints

Dec 06, 2015
Let's price the cost of power, shall we? What is the cost of wind contracts? Three to four cents? How about for PV? What is the cost of Vogtle? Thirteen to fifteen cents, and to pay it off, they want to charge their customers that for 40 years!

And "uses less land"??

What is the size of the off-limits contaminated area around Pripyat?

BTW, did any of our nuclear supporters ever dare to look up "Chernobyl children"?

Dec 06, 2015
is going to lead to the deaths of billions - due to poverty.
"The cost replacing nuclear power with wind and solar is estimated by the government to be over a trillion euros, without any assurances that the program will actually reduce emissions."
"Electricity from new wind power is nearly four times as expensive as electricity from existing nuclear power plants according to analysis from the Institute for Energy Research."
"Germany Abandons Nuclear Power, Increases CO2 Emissions"
http://dailycalle...issions/

contaminated area around Pripyat?
Pripyat - below natural radiation - the level of radiation does not exceed an equivalent dose of 1 μSv.
http://en.wikiped.../Pripyat
http://en.wikiped...adiation
5 mSv City of Pripyat (near Chernobyl)
20 mSv Fukushima
800 mSv Guarapari Beach (natural)
http://resources....ces.html

Dec 06, 2015
"Renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power offer too little, too late, and the anti-nuclear stance of some countries and almost all environmentalists will only drive many nations towards burning more coal, oil and gas"
"Nuclear power can be done safely, and with a relatively small environmental footprint," said Ken Caldeira of the Carnegie Institution for Science in Washington DC.
http://www.indepe...236.html

Dec 07, 2015
"Solar & wind still small in 25 years: 0.5% today, 2.4% in 2040 (optimistic scenario)"
http://pbs.twimg....SvbR.png
"World Energy Outlook 2015 (Released on 10 November 2015)"
http://www.worlde...weo2015/

Dec 07, 2015
Greenie, you are arguing with a billboard.

Willie is not real.


Dec 07, 2015
The renewable share of generation rises from 22% in 2013 to over 26% in 2020
Renewable is a general term that includes hydropower.
Unlike solar/wind, hydropower is a reliable baseload energy source, although due to monumental dams, it causes more ecological impact per gigawatt produced than nuclear.

Dec 07, 2015
And Willie's ladder suffers from Neutron embrittlement.

Dec 07, 2015
So we are starting from a small base. In 1850, 0% of world energy came from oil.
In middle ages, Europe was wind-powered. Windmills that have already shown to be intermittent and unreliable since ancient times. Wind-powered sailboats, replaced by steam power; symbolically last rung of the ladder.

Dec 08, 2015
Why aren't Willie and the other nuclear apologists at Fukushima trying to save Japan?

It would seem they would want to be there, to defend their positions, to show us how safe it really is, . .

Dec 08, 2015
renewables vs nukes. - http://cleantechn...l-fuels/
cleantechnica is not a reliable source; it is notoriously biased anti-nuclear as they selectively exclude comments, ban commentators, that disagree with their green hypocrisy.

Dec 09, 2015
liars and idiots
said it is cheap, almost for free; reality: COP21, wind/solar is costly and unreliable without cutting emissions; aside energy storage, natural landscapes, birds and bats, etc.
"wind and solar are difficult to manage because their production levels rise and falls according to wind strength and the amount of sunlight"

Dec 09, 2015
"One of nuclear energy's major advantages relative to other low-carbon energy sources is its unique ability to produce large-scale electricity around-the-clock in extreme weather conditions. Nuclear energy facilities don't rely on the wind blowing, the sun shining"
"Nuclear energy can produce a steady supply of baseload electricity with no greenhouse gas emissions thereby allowing the world to meet increased electricity demand, achieve economic development goals and carbon reductions"
http://www.yournu...262.html

Dec 09, 2015
What is the cost of a Kwh of power from wind, solar..?
So cheap, almost for free, as in gskam's dreams.

Dec 09, 2015
Fortunately, some environmentalists are becoming more conscious to fight against ecological hypocrisy.
"Many of those same environmentalists protest solar and wind projects because of the land they'd require and the wildlife they'd displace."
http://www.outsid...ns_h.jpg

Dec 09, 2015
The French are doing this for experience. They understand their own problems, and want to be ready to deal with them.


Dec 09, 2015
WillieWard FAILS illustrating lack of understand & immense ignorance of journalism with this facile attempt
Fortunately, some environmentalists are becoming more conscious to fight against ecological hypocrisy.
"Many of those same environmentalists protest solar and wind projects because of the land they'd require and the wildlife they'd displace."
http://www.outsid...ns_h.jpg
WillieWard has never heard of "The Provenance of Claim", in respect of his pathetic attempt to make a point all he can find is:-

1 A picture of nil Provenance
2 Opinion pieces random distributed
3 Nil peer reviewed articles
4 Nil basic physics articles
5 Nil comparative assessment

Nothing useful to make a case, WilliWard Fails to present any case whatsoever & he makes arbitrary claims never qualified & cannot answer my questions either,

Fail WilliWard, back to community college for you & soon...

Dec 09, 2015
Fortunately, some environmentalists are becoming more conscious to fight against ecological hypocrisy.
areas of outstanding natural beauty covered by bird and bat choppers in the name of unreliable wind power.
"wind projects would never be proposed for those beloved landmarks, located in more affluent areas"
http://media1.fdn...f127.jpg
http://www.sevend...=3053275


Dec 09, 2015
"wind projects would never be proposed for those beloved landmarks, located in more affluent areas"
-----------------------------------

Let them have a coal plant. Put it upwind.

Dec 09, 2015
Let them have a coal plant. Put it upwind.
"France's main energy source, nuclear (about 75 percent), is clean, with very low CO2 emissions." While Germany is burning a lot of fossil fuels to compensate wind/solar intermittency.
"nuclear is a very low carbon emitter and it should be part of the energy mix. The whole nuclear energy process from start to finish produces barely any CO2."
http://www.englis...be-heard
Ecologically, nuclear power is worth the price.

Dec 09, 2015
"Ecologically, nuclear power is worth the price."
-------------------------------------

Okay, then YOU pay it. I will use my PV panels and other means for power. That means YOU have to come up with the money to guard the high-level nuclear waste with deadly force, essentially forever.

Power from the newest nuke planets is already three to four TIMES the cost of power from alternative sources such as wind and PV.

Tell me you will contract to buy that high-cost nuke power over the low-cost and waste-free renewables.

Dec 09, 2015
"Photovoltaic (PV) modules typically come with 20 year warranties that guarantee that the panels will produce at least 80% of the rated power after 20 years of use."
www.engineering.c...nel.aspx
http://energyinfo...-panels/
http://cleantechn...issions/
While advanced nuclear power plants are able to provide clean and safe baseload energy for centuries.
https://en.wikipe..._Reactor
http://www.world-...151.html
http://www.ibtime...-1470349

Dec 09, 2015
While advanced nuclear power plants are able to provide high-level nuclear waste that lasts essentially forever.

Dec 09, 2015
nuclear waste that lasts essentially forever.
wind/solar's dirty secret: rare-earth metals, radioactive waste
http://institutef...inerals/
http://finance.to...age/full
http://www.mother...y-secret

Dec 10, 2015
Uruguay has ended their dependence on imported electricity, and is now getting 94% of their electricity from renewables
"Excluding hydro, renewable energy has proven to be unreliable."
https://en.wikipe..._Uruguay
Deaths per gigawatt (GW) per year (max)
Hydro: 36.3
Nuclear: 0.03
http://scienceblo...tricity/
http://www.busine...4_1.html

Dec 13, 2015
"suggesting that renewables will let us phase rapidly off fossil fuels in the United States, China, India, or the world as a whole is almost the equivalent of believing in the Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy."
" renewable energy sources like wind and solar "cannot scale up fast enough to deliver cheap and reliable power at the scale the global economy requires." "
"continued opposition to nuclear power threatens humanity's ability to avoid dangerous climate change."
"Atomic energy is indispensable in reducing greenhouse gases, but climate-change activists don't want to hear it." - Dec, 2015
http://www.nation...ar-power

Dec 13, 2015
Here is an interesting report:

http://www.inquis...rce/obj/

Dec 13, 2015
Here is an interesting report:
http://www.inquis...rce/obj/
It is more interesting yet that only special peoples that believes in "the Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy", like gskam, can detect it.
http://www.hirosh...ast.html
http://www.deepse...isaster/

Dec 13, 2015
Hi Willie. :)

You know how mercury accumulates in seafood to become a serious health risk to young children/pregnant mothers? Well, it's the accumulating dangerous radionuclides that are also the main worry. Sure, the 'free floating' radionuclides can also do damage if directly ingested/inhaled by humans; but it's the accumulation of said dangerous radionuclides in seafood eaten by humans and used in feeds for farmed fish/livestock that is another main worry. Not to mention the direct/cumulative effect on the living/dying sea creatures themselves and along the whole food chain even before it reaches us humans etc.

To your dismay, no doubt, the world has awakened; and our govt has resumed investment in windpower/other renewables projects (which industry our previous PM tried to destroy/sabotage as 'paid agent' of 'political donors' in the fossil industry...and for his lies campaigns for political advantage trying to fool the electorate. He's gone now, the lying twit). :)

Dec 13, 2015
mercury accumulates in seafood
Lead metal too.
"1.5 billion pounds of solar panel waste containing 2 million pounds of lead"
"Six companies report that their products contain lead, a potent neurotoxin."
http://www.mother...ls-toxic
"Lead is often used in electronic circuits, including solar PV circuits"
"Lead is highly toxic to the central nervous system, endocrine system, cardiovascular system, and kidneys."
"In one study, solar PV panels using lead solder exceeded by 30 percent the maximum allowable concentrations for lead in the Toxicity.."
http://www.txses....end-life

"fish in waters near the crippled Fukushima..radiation levels were not high enough to be detected by a dosimeter used during the session."
"..radiation levels above the sea are relatively low despite being only 1.5 km from the plant.."
http://ajw.asahi....11100001

Dec 13, 2015
Hi Willie. :)

Still with the desperate propaganda stas that do not tell the renewal story-by-comparison, mate? Why bother? The small amount of Lead etc in solar panels is recyclable. The nuclear waste/pollution is not. Anyway, you failed to mention that the Shooting (Lead bullets), Angling (Lead weights), military/industrial pollution and car-battery lead that finds its way to the environment already makes the lead content in solar cells insignificant by comparison. And that lead can be recovered/recycled.

Mate, you've lost. Give it up with the lame quotes/ stats campaign. The world is moving to green renewables with a vengeance now. Even our Conservative Govt realizes this and has renewed support for renewables which our previous conservative idiot PM tried to sabotage as a paid agent of the fossil industry which donated to his campaigns/lies. He's gone now. He and you/GOP/Lobbyists were on wrong side of history for self-serving reasons or unbelievable denial/ignorance.

Dec 14, 2015
You folks are arguing with a billboard. Willie is not real.

Dec 14, 2015
Germany Energiewende tells us the truth about wind/solar, twice costlier than France.
Country's energy grid is unbelievably expensive, and it has raised Germans' electricity prices.
http://joannenova...g-broke/
http://dailycalle...-system/
http://www.statis...untries/

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more