The Obama Administration has stated that we should start building more nuclear power plants. In doing so he would point to other counties which have built and operate far more nuclear plants than the United States has. Countries like Japan. You can't say the Japanese aren't careful about building something like a nuclear plant yet it seems the nuclear option may not be the best idea in a country prone to earthquakes to begin with. I'm thinking the Obama energy push will be somewhat less nuclear in the future. I'm thinking he'll even deny he ever brought it up.
Meanwhile the 155 LNG terminals and storage facilities and associated pipelines in Japan seem to have weathered the quake and the tsunamis very well. Any issues following the quake were handled by the individual crews at the sites and there was nothing major to deal with.
Which brings us back home to Clatsop County. The Japanese disaster serves as a great example of what the experts have been saying about LNG safety since the topic first came up. LNG has been around a very long time. The methods and materials for handling the product have developed along with advances in science over those years. Requiring Oregon Pipeline Company to present a fully fleshed out emergency plan before granting permits may seem reasonable but it's truly not. Requiring the company to have a plan in place before the gas is allowed to flow is reasonable. That's why it was deemed a "condition" of approval. As long as our emergency responders end up with everything they need to handle any conceivable emergency along the pipeline route, I'm happy. It's reasonable. To hold out on this issue shows the automatic bias of the commissioners. The fact that their own attorney had to warn them to actually have a reason for changing the requirements was troubling.
Bullseye, Tom!!
ReplyDeleteTom, the safety issue is a non issue with LNG. The anti sentimant is more in line with anti corporation and anti fossil fuels. In this case, don't follow the money, follow the nut trail.
ReplyDeleteNuclear not an option? From what I've heard, that plant is about 40 years old and was slated for decommissioning later this month. Nor was it the earthquake that caused the problems, but the tsunami taking out the generators (which supply emergency power to the cooling pumps). Allegedly, newer plant designs wouldn't be having the same problem.
ReplyDeleteBesides, if we eliminate from consideration every energy source which could be susceptible to natural disasters or terrorist attack ... we may as well resign ourselves to living in a pre-industrial, agrarian society.
Modular Nuclear Reactors can be fitted to adapt to need as well as be unplugged to be replaced as opposed to a one-off, ground anchored old-style facility
ReplyDeleteActually, given the age of these japanese reactors and the technology, I would hope that after this disaster, we increase or ability to research more safer nuclear energy programs and double the research at OSU to find the future capability to enhance this energy source.
ReplyDeleteWhen the Apollo program crashed, we didnt stop space exploration, there is no need to stop nuclear research and find the right method that is out there someday, safely.
New or old, nobody has figured out what to do with the old fuel rods. Plutonium-239 has a half-life of 25,000 years.
ReplyDeleteWell, Tom, if you actually updated your website with the comments of listeners in a timely manner, you would have heard something different. However, as long as you update when you feel like it and only select the information you want, you will be, unfortuately, very much like Steve Forrester's Daily A. So, why are you here anyway?
ReplyDelete