There is an unrecognized potential nuclear nightmare. We just experienced the strongest solar storm since 2003. Fortunately, it only struck our geomagnetic field a glancing blow. Has it hit directly, it could have brought down power grids for very long periods of time.
A nuclear plant without grid power for a month is a meltdown candidate as the standby diesel generators depend upon the grid. NASA and NOAA predict we are in for a dangerous few years of solar storms with the potential to collapse power grids worldwide for years. To see what that can cause, see: 400 Chernobyls? at my non-profit website www.aesopinstitute.org Decentralized, cost-competitive energy must now become an urgent matter. Mark ________________________________________ From: OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson [svj.orionwo...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, January 27, 2012 1:16 PM To: vortex-l Subject: [Vo]:Putting the nuclear debate into perspective Considering the pro/con ramifications of building 15 MW wind turbines I also noticed that there was some badmouthing of nuclear plants. I'm certainly all for getting rid of nuclear plants as soon as feasibly possible. However, before cleaner & cheaper energy becomes ubiquitous it stands to reason that nuclear plans should still be considered a reasonably effective way of generating heat & electricity. In the aftermath of the tragic Fukushima disaster many citizens of the planet have become terrified of the evils of nuclear energy and, of course, they have reason. There is, however, real irony in a little understood fact that nuclear plants (under normal operating conditions) emit less radiation into the atmosphere than equivalent coal fire plants. Probably a lot less. What the Fukushima disaster appears to have taught us in huge spades is the fact that locating nuclear plants where both earthquakes and tsunamis will occur on a regular basis is a really, really, REALLY bad idea. The lesson learned: DON'T do it! I want my sushi cold, not hot! OTOH, take another country, like France. They seem to have a pretty good handle on managing their nuclear plants. France's government wisely settled on standardizing the design of their nuclear plants. Standardization helped make it easier to comprehend what each plant's overall strengths and weaknesses are. It helps them know how best to maintain ALL of their nuclear plants. I'd imagine most of the French countryside is not prone to the ravages of fault lines either. Nor are tsunamis an issue - except perhaps for locations close to the Atlantic coast. The lesson learned: No fault lines nearby? No tsunamis nearby? Ok then, let's consider building a nuke plant here... but only after we talk a little more about it over a glass of wine. In the end, I hope my pro-nuclear stance is quickly rendered nothing more than an academic argument. I certainly hope so. However, in the absence of absolute certainty I feel it would be wise of me to continue hedging my bets. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
