Wind Power’s Mega-Fail: Hot Calm Weather Forces Nuclear Power Reboot in Taiwan & Japan

Anyone still banging on about CO2 emissions in the electricity generation sector, ought to be banging on about nothing other than nuclear power.

Nuclear power is the only, stand-alone generation source that can deliver reliable, affordable power without generating CO2 gas, in the process.

The fact that politicians in this Country talk about anything but nuclear power as a solution to Australia’s unfolding energy crisis, speaks volumes.

If CO2 gas really is the existential threat it’s made out to be, then nuclear power is the only solution.

In 2018, with debacles like wind ‘powered’ Germany, South Australia and Victoria on show, for all the World to see, anyone still talking about windmills, pumped hydro, mega-batteries and CO2 emissions can’t be taken seriously. And not only their motives, but also their sanity, has to be taken as suspect.

Australia is the only G20 Country to a place to ban on the use of uranium as a power source. Notwithstanding that it’s the largest uranium exporter, in the World.

Hackneyed arguments about the cost of nuclear power are readily scotched with reference to nuclear powered France, which gets more than 75% of its power from nuclear plant, and yet the French pay around half of what wind ‘powered’ South Australians pay for power (see above), and that’s when they can get it.

Earlier this year, the State of Pennsylvania sent a delegation to Australia to lure energy hungry businesses, with a promise of power prices, a mere fraction of those paid here.

Commercial users in Pennsylvania are paying 8.85 cents per KWh, equating to US$88.50 per MWh. Industrial users are paying 6.67 cents per KWh, equating to US$66.70. Depending on the State they’re in, Australian commercial users are paying upwards of A$0.35 per KWh, or A$350 per MWh hour, in SA it’s A$0.47 per KWh, or A$470 per MWh.

According to the US Energy Information Administration, in 2016, Pennsylvania ranked second in the nation in electricity generation from nuclear power, which supplied 39% of the state’s net electricity generation, more than from any other source.

So, claims that nuclear power is more expensive than wind and solar power amount to nonsense. And, of course, nuclear power doesn’t need giant batteries, pumped hydro, or furtive prayers to the Wind Gods to deliver the goods, day in, day out, whatever the weather.

The reason that wind power will never be a meaningful power generation source is simple: it’s called the ‘wind’.

Michael Shellenberger is one of those characters who most certainly bangs on about carbon dioxide gas. Sure, it’s a naturally occurring trace gas, essential for life on earth [Note to Ed: you’re breathing it out, right now, and plants will die without it].

But, until the next ice age hits us, climate alarmists will never let CO2 go, nor will they let energy policy alone.

Which is one solid reason to support nuclear power. The other is that, when the sun sets and/or calm weather sets in, it just keeps on trucking.

As Heatwave Tests The Limits Of Renewables, Anti-Nuclear Governments Return To Nuclear
Forbes
Michael Shellenberger
26 July 2018

Even anti-nuclear governments are turning to nuclear power to deal with a record-breaking heatwave, which has increased demand for electricity to power air conditioning around the world.

To meet rising electricity demand, South Korea’s anti-nuclear government announced last week that it would increase the number of operating nuclear reactors from 14 to 19, even re-starting two reactors that were scheduled to be closed this summer for maintenance.

Anti-nuclear Germany has had to rely heavily on its remaining nuclear plants and its coal plants even during daylight hours when Germany’s solar panels are at maximum production. The reason? Very little wind.

In June, Taiwan’s anti-nuclear government was forced to restart a closed nuclear reactor in order to meet demand. Last year, the island nation suffered its worst power outage ever when seven million homes were left without electricity.

In anticipation of high electricity demand during the summer, the Japanese government accelerated the restarting of nuclear reactors closed after Fukushima. Nuclear capacity has nearly doubled since March.

The reliance on nuclear power plants by anti-nuclear governments shows the limits of renewables and conservation

After the 2011 Fukushima panic, Japan shuttered its nuclear plants and invested heavily in conservation and efficiency. The limits of those efforts were felt this week as sales of air conditioners by a leading retailer increased 70 percent compared to last year.

California has spent billions on conservation and efficiency programs but found itself this week pleading with residents to reduce energy consumption during the heatwave. “Plan somewhere to go if you lose power,” a National Weather Service expert warned.

California’s solar has been of limited use because as reported the San Diego Union-Tribune, “solar production falls off when the sun goes down and energy users come home from work, turn on their air conditioners and use appliances that suck up a lot of power, such as washer/dryers.”

And solar panels produce less electricity in heatwaves. “According to the manufacture standards, a 25 °C (77 °F) temperature indicates the peak of the optimum temperature range of solar panels,” solar experts say. “It is when solar cells are able to absorb sunlight with maximum efficiency.”

“Summer temperatures that can reach 50C, combined with the build-up of dust, can reduce the efficiency of a photovoltaic panel by more than half” in hot climates, reported The Times of London last year.

Wholesale electricity prices in California rose to $1000 per megawatt-hour — a whopping 30 times more expensive than last year’s average price.

South Korea’s news media have criticized the government for underestimating electricity demand in order to justify its anti-nuclear policies.

“Such failures in predicting power demand suggest the government arbitrarily lowered its estimated demand to back up its logic for phasing out nuclear plants,” editorialized a South Korean newspaper.

The irony is that many anti-nuclear governments justify their policies as addressing climate change, which may be contributing to the heatwave.

“This is what the future looks like for us,” a Los Angeles utility spokesperson warned. “We are seeing real extremes in the way of what we’re having to deal with.”

“The government’s rush to phase out nuclear increased electricity from plants using coal and natural gas,” the South Korean newspaper editorialize, “which pose serious threats to the environment.”

Will the heatwave serve as a wake-up call to anti-nuclear governments?

Taiwan may be the first test case. It is set to close a nuclear plant in December, but memories of this summer’s heat and last summer’s blackouts may prevent that.

California’s anti-nuclear government is moving ahead with plans to close Diablo Canyon nuclear plant, which provides nine percent of the state’s electricity, by 2025.

In California, electricity prices have risen five times faster than in rest of the U.S. since 2011, when the state began expanding the deployment of renewables and closed a nuclear plant.

Cost increases even in normal conditions are worsened by the loss of nuclear; it stands to reason that during severe events such as this summer’s heat waves, cost increases will be especially severe.

The heatwave forced even anti-nuclear groups like Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), which supports closing Diablo Canyon, to acknowledge that “Demand for power [is] only going up.”

“Besides the fact that utilities must serve 50 million more Americans than they did just 20 years ago,” editorialized EDF, “each of us relies more on electricity. Whether it’s our iPhones and laptops or the cloud services we connect them to, our personal and business lives are completely dependent on power and a reliable grid.”

And that’s not to mention the accelerating transition to electric cars, whose demand for electricity could grow 300-fold between 2016 and 2040.
Forbes

Fretting about CO2? Then this’ll put a lid on it.

About stopthesethings

We are a group of citizens concerned about the rapid spread of industrial wind power generation installations across Australia.

Comments

  1. There is a little issue…
    First, the Gov needs to choose an option from these
    1. Rosatom
    2. Orano (Areva)
    3. Westinghouse

    Obviously, the Option number 1 is anti-religious by many reasons.
    The Option number 2 is very interesting – have a look at long fairy tale about the Olkiluoto Unit 3. only 14 years in building stage and far from the finish. So, this Country will spend a lot for nothing.
    Wests could be the best choice, but there is still no AP1000 running!!! In other words, they have no proof what is economy of running an AP1000 reactor.

    My question – Who will build the first Australian nuclear power plant?

  2. Weasels 2 Go says:

    STT is well written and well informed. Its judgement and analysis of Australia’s (and others’ ) energy situation is inarguable. But, sadly, its persistent message is so far largely ignored by politicians, responsible bureaucrats and the press (collectively the “Climate “Ignorati”).

    To state the obvious, somehow the “Climate Rationalists” have to disconnect the Government and their advisors from the Ignorati.

    On one side we have the wind industry and their billions of subsidies (paid by the consumers), misleading propaganda from many quarters devoured as manna from heaven, metro greens and most of the labour and greens’ parties.

    On the other side we have STT, the Waubra Foundation (stripped of its properly awarded deductible gift status), a few individuals including some in the conservative (rational) press and the transient groups of local objectors.

    There is little doubt that State Ministers are issuing permits that conflict with Planning and Environment and Health Acts. They also issue permits knowing that that the noise guidelines are technically irrelevant, do not protect project neighbours and, in truth, are licences to damage.

    Perhaps it is time that STT might:;

    start to discuss health and human rights issues by extracting information previously posted by the Waubra Foundation,

    encouraging and somehow facilitating the bringing of lawsuits that are presently incubating underneath cost and other difficulties.

  3. Now if we can just get Concorde 2.0 flying and Space Shuttle 2.0 into orbit, mankind should be back on track!

    Star Trek, here we come!!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: