Krauthammer: Let’s face it, nuclear power is dead

posted at 8:21 pm on March 21, 2011 by Allahpundit

If the public can be led to believe that foreign aid and earmarks are big drivers of the national debt, I suppose they can be led to believe that the Fukushima crisis “proves” nuclear power is too dangerous to handle. Which side’s going to take the lead on pushing that message on them, though? Conservatives have been lamenting the moratorium on new nuke plants after Three Mile Island for decades, and liberals are too invested in using clean energy to mitigate global warming to give up on nuclear power after one scary setback. Greenpeace and the rest of the hardcore environmentalist lobby will do their best to exploit this, but even Obama has refused thus far to suspend any nuclear energy projects in the works. So how, exactly, will the “no nukes” movement gain traction? Especially now that Japan’s nuclear situation “is on the verge of stabilizing” and stories like this are starting to appear:

ProPublica spoke with seven top nuclear engineers and scientists to at least establish some boundaries for the disaster’s potential health and environmental impacts.

The rough consensus: The long-term and most severe effects from radiation at the plant, where four of six reactors are in crisis and hundreds of tons of spent fuel is a risk, will be largely contained to the area around the plant, affect a relatively limited population and will likely not spread outside Japan…

Experts interviewed by ProPublica said that even if a meltdown scenario unfolded unabated, the contamination would likely remain localized and would not affect a large population because evacuations have already been ordered. There remains uncertainty about whether worst-case contamination could reach as far as Tokyo, about 150 miles from the Fukushima plant, but few believe there is any chance of dangerous levels of contamination spreading offshore.

Follow the link and read down to the very end of that piece for your quote of the day. The plant is 40 years old, used containment vessels of questionable integrity, was hit with an earthquake and tsunami of Biblical proportions, and it still didn’t produce a worst-case-scenario of total meltdown in the reactor or among the spent fuel rods. Emphasizing that point together with the many upgrades in nuclear safety since Fukushima was built, including the advent of pebble-bed reactors, will reassure plenty of nuke skeptics, especially if Democrats and Republicans push the idea jointly. Bipartisanship fever — catch it!

After you watch the Krauthammer clip, be sure to have a look at this nifty graphic representation of radiation levels from XKCD. As you’ll see, in one very specific spot northwest of Fukushima, the radiation dosage lit up the green box. Most everywhere else, though, the radiation spike was negligible. Click the image to watch.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

STP in Texas

Sorry Texan SB Texas and it is to be a ABWR (Advanced Boiling Water Reactor) not the AP1000 but it also is not yet licensed in the US.

whbates on March 21, 2011 at 11:39 PM

So GWB had two terms to move things along and what do we have today? Bupkis. Why? The enviro lobby and Democrats. Neither are going away soon. The enviros have been emboldened in their anti-nuke stance, all while being aided and abetted by the MSM. Future nuclear plants are dead in this country for our lifetimes.

And yes, many of you are in a conservative bubble.

toliver on March 22, 2011 at 12:06 AM

I read so many of your comments here and have to say that Krauthammer is being pragmatic based on past history. You know, history, the thing we think the rest of the people don’t know?

I was at York, PA, for a conference the night of 3 mile island. I lived within 100 miles of it for most of my life. No one really worried about it — the conference hotel was full up, people knew what had happed — but few, if any, worried about “being nuked”.

I would guess that the Saturday Night Live skit showing giant Garrett Morris and giant Jimmy Carter (a spoof of The China Syndrome) reached more people and had more impact on their thinking about nuclear generators than anything else.

Greyledge Gal on March 22, 2011 at 12:09 AM

There were nearly 6,420,000 auto accidents in the United States in 2005. The financial cost of these crashes is more than 230 Billion dollars. 2.9 million people were injured and 42,636 people killed. About 115 people die every day in vehicle crashes in the United States — one death every 13 minutes.

sharrukin on March 21, 2011 at 8:52 PM

And everyone accepts it as the cost of doing business.

But the fact is that the American people don’t accept the infinitesimally smaller risks associated with radiation. Do you remember TMI? I sure do. People freaked. People freaked bad. People freaked bad who, even under the worst of conditions, wouldn’t have been affected.

And this is considerably worse than TMI. We’re already starting to see falloff in support for nuclear. Is it irrational? Absolutely. But that doesn’t make the opposition to it any less real.

Let me ask you: Knowing that Obama and the Left has this in their back pocket, would you advise a potential GOP Presidential candidate to make large-scale expansion of nuclear plants a central theme of their campaign?

JohnGalt23 on March 21, 2011 at 9:16 PM

The “TMI accident” happened just days ofter the Anti-nuclear propaganda movie “The China Syndrome” hit the theaters. I have become convinced that “TMI accident” was the result of sabotage.

Slowburn on March 22, 2011 at 12:15 AM

sharrukin on March 21, 2011 at 10:53 PM

Actually nuclear is very competitive with coal and oil generation and that is with the regulations meant to choke the industry to death.

First, could you provide a link for your data?

Second, The Dept. of Energy puts the costs of nuclear generation above most forms of coal or gas production. I’ll agree it is competitive, but certainly not obviously superior.

And once again, coal and natural gas can be done quicker, and without the stigma that polls are already showing is being attached to nuclear generation.

JohnGalt23 on March 22, 2011 at 12:21 AM

I cannot stand Krauthammer the kenite. This is the man you all worship

True_King on March 22, 2011 at 12:24 AM

First, could you provide a link for your data?

JohnGalt23 on March 22, 2011 at 12:21 AM

http://www.egea.eu/congresses/wrc08/content/pages/congress/workshops/1/The%20Economics%20of%20Nuclear%20Power.pdf

sharrukin on March 22, 2011 at 12:30 AM

canopfor on March 21, 2011 at 8:40 PM

Now that was funny!!
Nicely done!

KMC1 on March 22, 2011 at 1:25 AM

True_King on March 22, 2011 at 12:24 AM

What’s a kenite?

Cindy Munford on March 22, 2011 at 1:26 AM

Who writes this guys stuff?
Netanyahu? Somebody who wants the US stuck in the ME forever?
Apparently Krauthammer didn’t get the memo.
GE has an equal share at the table of public opinion forming now and GE says there are entirely too many 5 year budgets made up of nuclear project work to be giving nuclear the stinkeye right here. So we don’t get the China Syndrome histrionics this time. Sorry Benyamin.

pc on March 22, 2011 at 1:46 AM

pc on March 22, 2011 at 1:46 AM

What does Benyamin Netanyahu have to do with our energy plans?

Cindy Munford on March 22, 2011 at 2:12 AM

pc on March 22, 2011 at 1:46 AM

What does Benyamin Netanyahu have to do with our energy plans?

Cindy Munford on March 22, 2011 at 2:12 AM

He made a speech about discontinuing nuclear power in Israel, but he has that newly found gas bonanza off his coast, that they are tapping ASAP if not sooner.

Slowburn on March 22, 2011 at 3:36 AM

Lithium.

Django on March 22, 2011 at 4:21 AM

Safe nuclear does exist, and China is leading the way with thorium by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard

“China’s Academy of Sciences said it had chosen a “thorium-based molten salt reactor system”. The liquid fuel idea was pioneered by US physicists at Oak Ridge National Lab in the 1960s, but the US has long since dropped the ball. Further evidence of Barack `Obama’s “Sputnik moment”, you could say. Chinese scientists claim that hazardous waste will be a thousand times less than with uranium. The system is inherently less prone to disaster. “The reactor has an amazing safety feature,” said Kirk Sorensen, a former NASA engineer at Teledyne Brown and a thorium expert. “If it begins to overheat, a little plug melts and the salts drain into a pan. There is no need for computers, or the sort of electrical pumps that were crippled by the tsunami. The reactor saves itself,” he said. ”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/8393984/Safe-nuclear-does-exist-and-China-is-leading-the-way-with-thorium.html

Viator on March 22, 2011 at 5:47 AM

I get the, “down with elitists” populism. But come on man! This dumb is smart and smart is dumb trip is just dumb (and no I don’t really mean smart). One can disagree with CK, but for the boobs here who are calling him dumb it gives a whole new meaning to the word risible!

As I said, one can disagree with CK, but he is certainly a voice well worth hearing. In this case, as a highly respected psychiatrist (that’s the real kind of doctor who can dispense prescriptions and everything) he is worth hearing out when it comes to human nature. You know, such as how people may react to an event such as the Japanese catastrophe.

I hereby announce that the great intellectual inversion is over. I declare that once again smart is smart and dumb is dumb. Get used to it!

MJBrutus on March 22, 2011 at 7:06 AM

Slowburn on March 22, 2011 at 3:36 AM

Is Bibi a kenite?

MJBrutus on March 22, 2011 at 7:10 AM

MJBrutus on March 22, 2011 at 7:06 AM

You had me until you referred to psychiatrists as “real kind[s] of doctor[s].” If you knew the direction psychiatry has taken during the past couple of decades, you wouldn’t have a great deal of respect for them. But I’m with you that anyone who refers to CK as an “idiot” or “dumb” is just plain silly.

DrMagnolias on March 22, 2011 at 7:37 AM

You had me until you referred to psychiatrists as “real kind[s] of doctor[s].” If you knew the direction psychiatry has taken during the past couple of decades, you wouldn’t have a great deal of respect for them. But I’m with you that anyone who refers to CK as an “idiot” or “dumb” is just plain silly.

DrMagnolias on March 22, 2011 at 7:37 AM

I think he meant “real” in the sense that psychiatrists are M.D.’s – they go to medical school and get their medical license, they just specialize in psychiatry. As opposed, say, to psychologists, who may be “doctors” in teh sense of having obtained a Phd, but do not have a medical degree. Those are only “doctors” to the same degree that an english professor is a “doctor”. Or a chiropractor (boy, do I hate referring to chiropractor’s as “doctor” when I am in a situation where I have to come across as civil).

Monkeytoe on March 22, 2011 at 7:49 AM

Well, this is great. Set future policy for the world before the dust settles and we even know what went wrong or right.Sarah is looking like the only leader we have.

Herb on March 22, 2011 at 8:58 AM

Pebble bed reactors may not be quite so ready for prime time as you seem to indicate in the repeated references to the technology on various Hotair posts. There is currently only one pebble bed reactor up and running at this time, and it’s in China. There are several prototypes around the world, but it’s not as though this is a time-tested method of producing nuclear energy. While it is definitely promising, there are also pitfalls to consider, such as a greatly increased volume of nuclear waste and potential shearing damage and dust formation on the graphite pebbles.

Don’t get me wrong – it’s a very promising technology, potentially even groundbreaking, but it’s definitely not an off-the-shelf technology such that we could just decide to go stand up a dozen PBMRs and plug them into the grid in the next two years.

Beo on March 22, 2011 at 11:28 AM

I think this will have the opposite effect when the final tally proves that the plant’s failsafes for containment still carried the day – especially after all the media fright.

People are going to wear out from the apocalyptic noise on nuclear because it is constantly disproven by experience. This is what is happening to the climate warming-cooling-change-or-whatever-it’s-just-bad argument. Credibility lost is lost forever.

Let us not forget that the US Navy has been handling hundreds of nuke reactors since what, 1953? And what do they do with these nukes? They drive over ocean swells and through storms in excess of 30 knots. They land fighters and bombers on top of them. They dive them deep into the oceans and bring them back up again. They store solid fuel missiles and warheads next to them and launch these weapons above them. Not one nuclear accident in over half a century – not one.

And the two nuke subs they lost to other causes – lying on an ocean bottom for 4 decades and neither is leaking radiation.

This is the herald for the coming death knell of the anti-nuke movement.

Cricket624 on March 22, 2011 at 1:38 PM

Monkeytoe on March 22, 2011 at 7:49 AM

Sorry I’m so slow, I’ve been away. The history of degrees is an interesting one, but Ph.D. is an academic degree, and M.D. is a professional degree. Ph.D.s are the original “doctors,” and M.D.s were once considered Ph.D.s until it was determined that their knowledge was not equivalent to the Ph.D. (the highest degree attainable). This isn’t to knock the M.D.–heaven knows they are needed and valuable–but it is to point out that Ph.D.s have a legitimate claim to the title “Dr.”

DrMagnolias on March 22, 2011 at 3:42 PM

No one seems to be talking about the fact that the current generation of reactors are designed to use passive cooling following an earthquake like the one in Japan. No active pumping of coolant is needed to keep the reactor core cool. People should keep in mind that the Japanese reactors are 50 year old designs that will never be built again. I’m sure that work will be done to improve emergency response planning for potential accidents in the older designs. But, we shouldn’t overreact to what has happened in Japan. Earthquakes of this magnitude have a return period of less than 1 in 1000 years. So, they don’t really happen very often. Therefore, if we continue to build reactors, the most likely outcome is that we will have replaced all of the older designs with passively cooled reactors before we need to worry about another beyond design basis earthquake. Even with the older reactors, the likely outcome is zero acute fatalities with a small number of excess cancers somewhere in the future and most of these cancers will likely be curable. The most significant loss from the Japanese reactor plant accident is economic rather than human. In an environment where the earthquake/tsunami death figures are now north of 22,000 people, I find the hysteria over the reactor accident to be a bit ridiculous.

NuclearPhysicist on March 22, 2011 at 4:55 PM

NuclearPhysicist on March 22, 2011 at 4:55 PM

I know that you’re perfectly correct concerning plant safety. I happily live within 50 miles of a nuke plant (Sharon Harris). I know it to be safe and would love to see the bulk of our power generation provided by even better plants. I mourn that Dr. K’s assessment may be accurate, but I am not going to pretend that he isn’t likely to be right.

MJBrutus on March 22, 2011 at 5:21 PM

I wish everyone who has concerns about nuclear power whold spend a couple hour googling Liquid Flouride Thorium Reactors, LFTR pronounced lifter.

TomLawler on March 23, 2011 at 12:53 AM

I wish everyone who has concerns about nuclear power would spend a couple hours googling Liquid Flouride Thorium Reactors, LFTR pronounced lifter.
Sorry about the repost. Typos bug me.

TomLawler on March 23, 2011 at 12:56 AM

Comment pages: 1 2