(Eric Jelinski, James Conca, John Shanahan) Canada, USofA - What energy mix will North America have in 2100?06.Jan.2020
Eric Jelinski, past president of Environmentalists for Nuclear - Canada, farmer, environmentalist, university lecturer with degrees in mechanical and chemical nuclear engineering: There is no such thing as renewable energy. Could you build a renewable energy system without any support from coal, oil or natural gas? I’d like to see the renewable energy advocates mine, manufacture and transport everything that is needed for wind and solar farms and electrical distribution networks using wind and solar alone. Jim Conca, geologist, science and energy writer for Forbes predicts the 2100 mix will be natural gas and wind. John Shanahan, civil engineer says that natural gas and nuclear is better.
Irene Aegerter, physicist, Simon Aegerter, physicist: Nuclear Energy has a bad name and is allegedly not wanted by the people. Yet, even after Harrisburg, Tschernobyl and Fukushima it remains the cleanest, safest and most environmentally safe source of energy and – if done right – will become the cheapest. With new generations of nuclear reactors, the perceived dangers of nuclear power will be eliminated: The Generation IV reactors are inherently safe in normal and abnormal operations, they are proliferation resistant and they use the long lived "waste" isotopes as fuel. They utilize Thorium and all of the Uranium, thereby making the available resources essentially inexhaustible.
Don Bogard, radio-geochemistry, nuclear geochemistry, planetary science: This article is another scientist's opinion on use of fossil fuels and what will be required for a transition when fossil fuels eventually run out or if governments decide to force abandonment of these energy resources that have created the modern world. He makes a very important conclusion: "Any significant change to the US power infrastructure MUST be a measured and long-term endeavor." There are several reasons for the long transition time: a) We don't have the technical ability to build nuclear plants that fast. b) We must establish used nuclear fuel reprocessing, mainly to save the unused 99% of nuclear energy from the ore. Don't put it back in the ground "forever." c) We must establish standard ways of storing the remaining radioactive waste. d) Nuclear power should only be used in countries with stable governments, strong economies, good education systems, well developed industries to perform some of the maintenance operations. e) We must develop additional nuclear power technologies besides the very large Light Water Reactors of the past. Don Bogard understands these needs. Too many outside the nuclear power profession wrongfully claim that the whole world can be owning and operating nuclear plants in fifty or one hundred years. In reality, it will be several centuries, maybe longer. We must have wise energy planning for the whole world NOW. That must include fossil fuels for generating electricity, not abandoning them for wind and solar.
Open Letter to Heads of Government of the G-20 from Scientists and Scholars on Nuclear for Climate Change (Michael Shellenberger) USofA31.Dec.2019
Michael Shellenberger, Founder - President of Environmental Progress: We are writing as scientists, scholars, and concerned citizens to warn you of a persistent anti-nuclear bias in the recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report on keeping global temperatures from rising 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels.