A view on nuclear power before Japan

Last Wednesday we interviewed Burton Richter, Professor Emeritus at Stanford and Nobel Laureate, and asked him about his views on the nuclear power policies in the US and energy politics in general. This was before the earthquake in Japan, and before the nuclear meltdown risks. I am sure we’ll go back to him and ask him for a response to this latest nuclear (luckily still potential) disaster.

Burton is a very outspoken and highly knowledgeable energy expert. I always enjoy talking to him and hearing his views.

Bye, Bye, Nuclear Power

Fukushima Daiichi, the nuclear reactor in Japan that is keeping us all on the edge of our seat right now and holding our breath. This morning it became clear that reactor 1 and 3 in this second generation nuclear power plant are probably OK, but reactor 2 is likely melting down because of a stuck valve. The broken valve makes it impossible right now to pour cooling water into the reactor and the rods are out of control. The rods are still inside a containment vessel, but it is not clear how much heat and pressure this can hold. Well, we’ll find out but it’s not the best way to conduct a pressure test.

The damaged Fukujima Daicchi nuclear plant. Photo from NYtimes.com

Fears of nuclear energy are growing. Even though the troubled reactor is not a third generation reactor, which are considered to be much safer, it is unlikely that this nuclear crisis in Japan will be ignored in future nuclear energy debates. My guess is that it will lead to an immediate hold on nuclear power in the US, and possibly also in Europe. Germany already reacted today by deciding to hold off on life extension of several of its nuclear power plants. Germany has been debating this for a long time, and is not as pro-nuclear as other European countries such as France and Sweden, but still it is a significant political step.

What will this mean for US energy politics? The combination of increased fear of nuclear power and rising oil prices is already leading to a renewed “Drill, Baby, Drill” call, not even a year after the Deepwater Horizon disaster. You’d think that after oil spills, meltdowns of Chernobyl in the 80s and likely Japan now, and coal mining accidents, we’d hear the urgent and very loud calls “Save, Baby, Save” for efficiency, “Blow, Baby, Blow” for wind and “Shine, Baby, Shine” for solar. But, I don’t think that these calls will be any louder here than the Drill call.

So, I’m holding my breath for several reasons this morning, anxiously checking the computer for the latest news out of Japan, and anxiously awaiting the response of congress and the administration. Days like these, it’s hard to be the optimist I usually try to be: it is hard to smile when you cannot breathe. I am sure I’m not alone. Surely, Burton Richter will feel pretty down as well right now. We interviewed him just last week about the future of nuclear energy. I think he can say bye, bye to nuclear power. Check out our interview with him in the next post.

Learn from (virtual) DoE experts

This is nice: the Department of Energy (DOE) will host a monthly series of live video presentations highlighting DOE programs  and offering online interactions with leading DOE experts.

The first event in this series is scheduled for this coming Wednesday (March 16th) and will feature Patrick Davis, DOE’s Vehicle Technologies Program Manager. Patrick will discuss the Administration’s goal of deploying 1 million electric vehicles by 2015.  Future broadcasts will focus on energy efficiency, green cities, renewable energy, smart grid, and transportation, amongst others.

Attending such a virtual forum fits nicely into our “Save, baby, Save” campaign to reduce our carbon footprint. And, you can make yourself a nice cuppa tea and watch the video in the comfort of your own room.

Complimentary registration is available on the Virtual Energy Forum website.

 

 

A Brazilian oil carnival?

 

Inside the Sambadrome during Brazil's Carnival. Image from Wikimedia

My Brazilian friends are recovering from their Rio carnival, which ended on Tuesday. One of these years, I’ve got to go and throw my Dutch, and usually somewhat reserved, self in the energetic mix.

Brazil is not just famous for its carnivalistic energy, but also for its liquid energy. In the Bush years, Brazil was heralded in DC as the big example for ethanol production. The sugarcane ethanol produced in Brazil would not make a great dent in our consumption. At its peak it is just under 0.5 million barrels per day, which is around two-thirds of the daily US ethanol production and under 3% of our total daily consumption. I am no fan of biofuels and would not applaud a growth in this area, not here and not anywhere. Sugarcane plantations in Brazil have driven other crops further into the Amazon leading to deforestation, have led to depletion and erosion of valuable land, and many have been proven to abuse large numbers of poor workers for the benefit of the few, as Father Tiago so passionately describes in his 2007 interview.

But, it is not really ethanol that Brazil is known for in liquid fuel circles. Instead it is its growth in oil and gas production, particularly offshore.  The oil, and gas, production in Brazil is predicted to increase dramatically in the next decades. Petrobras, the Brazilian oil company, is rapidly growing, in Brazil and overseas. In 1999, Petrobas was listed as the 27th largest energy company in the world. This year, it surpassed Chevron and Shell, based on total value (not on annual production) and entered the top 3. This is an incredible growth in just over a decade.

Petrobras' P-51 offshore platform, the first platform built entirely in Brazil. Image via Wikipedia

And Petrobras is hungry to expand further through a five-year investment program of over 200 billion dollars total. This should allow Petrobras to double its production in ten years to over five million barrels of oil per day. Where would it get all this extra oil and gas? The company would tap into the vast pre-salt reserves that have been discovered far offshore and very deep below the ocean floor.  These reserves are very hard to get to as they reside underneath large salt layers or domes. Pre-salt drilling requires much higher pressure than typical offshore oil and the salt layer may shift after drilling. Known for its technological know-how in deep and ultra-deep drilling, the company can probably get to the pre-salt oil, if investors bite. Investors are wary, though, after the BP disaster in the Gulf, and it is not clear if the confidence they have in Petrobras, which is a very well respected company in this field, is high enough to warrant the loans. The tenacious relation that Petrobras has with the Brazilian government doesn’t help. The government now also requires that Petrobras be the lead operator on offshore developments in Brazilian territory. Norway has similar requirements and it has served that country well. The Brazilian government no doubt hopes that revenues will help lift Brazil out of poverty and support its rapid growth.

Despite these uncertainties, there is no doubt that Brazil will be a strong and growing exporter of oil in the years to come. With a dwindling excess capacity in OPEC, and turmoil in the Middle East, this is perhaps not so bad.

Fractitious fracking?

Shale gas production featured strongly again today with a thought provoking article on fracking in the New York Times. I highly recommend it. It once again shows the strong role politics plays in energy production. This is no surprise since energy is a multi-billion dollar per day industry. It is also no secret that the fossil fuel industry, including the gas industry, spends millions on lobbying in Washington and at state levels.

I think that the pressure applied by the gas industry and supporters will lead to fracking permits, some of which will be given too hastily and without enough thought or oversight. What I hope is that the current debate, and the many protesting voices raised from other segments of the population, will help to caution the industry, and convince it that it is better to be safe than sorry.