by Axios | 8.16.18
Countable asks: Should the U.S. follow China's lead by moving away from coal toward cleaner, lower-carbon fuels, including nuclear? Why or why not? Hit Take Action to tell your reps, then share your thoughts below. (Via: Axios)
If China achieves the targets outlined in its Energy Development Strategy Action Plan, it will become the world's nuclear energy leader and fundamentally change the global trajectory of the nuclear power industry.
Data: World Nuclear Association; Note: Output of currently operable reactors measured in net MWe (electrical megawatts), while output of future reactors measured in gross MWe; Graphic: Harry Stevens/Axios
The big picture: It's not a foregone conclusion that China will follow through on its plans, especially with the public resistance stemming from the 2011 Fukushima meltdown in Japan. But if Xi Jinping and his administration decide to press on, China will be solidly on track to dominate the nuclear landscape.
The backdrop: In 2005, China began planning an aggressive increase in nuclear generating capacity, with a 15-year trajectory in mind. That has the country's energy future set to reach a crossroads in 2020, when the Communist Party will craft its 14th Five Year Plan.
The other side: Hibbs, who is the author of "The Future of Nuclear Power in China," also said that when China came up with its nuclear plans in 2005, they were based on three key assumptions.
In 2018, none of those assumptions are safe. And while the government has pledged to clean its air by transitioning away from fossil fuels, the alternative is currently more expensive and could cause more than 5 million coal miners to lose their jobs.
The bottom line: China must consider these challenges and more as it hurtles toward the 2020 nexus. But if the country succeeds in surmounting the political risks and commercializing advanced nuclear systems, there will be a push worldwide to generalize these achievements beyond China's borders.
Written by Axios
Follow this Action Center to stay updated on new posts
Nuclear is great for base-load, far less polluting, and far less dangerous than diesel or coal. The fear about nuclear energy is mostly unfounded. It’s like mass hysteria trauma more than anything else. You actually look at the science, it’s the safest energy generation system. It’s just when something went wrong in the past it was truly horrible. The technology is a lot better these days. The modern nuclear technology cannot melt down the same way that Chernobyl melted down. And Fukushima was a natural disaster that was exacerbated by bad government choices. What went wrong there was what happened AFTER. Not that I think that we should replace all of our baseload generation power with nuclear energy. Hydro would be better. There are plenty of more sustainable energy systems that cause less hysteria then nuclear power. Even if they’re not actually safer.
Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima all show the vulnerability of nuclear power let alone the waste problem. Wind, solar, and hydropower need more research than a space force.
Our efforts should be focused on researching new methods of energy, including Nuclear. We have plenty of reserve coal and NG to use whilst research is being conducted. At the moment, The disaster nuclear energy poses if mishandled is catastrophic at best. Nuclear energy has the power to destroy an entire country if misused, we must better understand it before we harness its full capability.
Kudos, nuclear energy is the future. We’re over here stuck in the past of the coal industry while other countries are making big moves.
Nuclear cleaner than coal? Only in the very short term. Nuke waste NEVER GOES AWAY AND SO-CALLED SAFE STORAGE IS AN ABSOLUTE JOKE. Nuclear waste is deadly toxic for bloody centuries. Contamination risks increase every year FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL CONTAINER!! Don’t get me wrong. I love the technology but the incontrovertible facts of long-term cost and cause/effect are perfectly clear. Nuke is not the way to go even for us. We have the Nuclear Regulatory Agency, OSHA, and EPA as watchdogs, and we still make mistakes. Russia? The Arctic Sea to their north practically glows in the dark. China? With their environmental and workplace safety records? I guarantee that they will pay a steep price for their nuclear energy. And with all the breeder reactors that will spring up, so will everyone else.
NO to nuclear energy!
They are the new leaders of the world since trump We’re just a sick, sad, sideshow
What has the NRC been doing? If we aren’t leading in nuclear energy then fire the head of the NRC and find someone that will make it happen.