Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Regulators call for redesign of Areva's EPR reactor

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
bananas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-03-09 10:24 AM
Original message
Regulators call for redesign of Areva's EPR reactor
Source: France 24/AFP

Nuclear regulators in France, Britain and Finland said Monday they have told French nuclear giant Areva and its foreign partners to correct a safety design flaw on its latest-generation EPR reactor.

Any redesign could increase already costly delays in completing the first two of the reactors being built by Areva in France and Finland, and undermine French attempts to create a massive export market for its technology.

<snip>

But the regulators said control systems used to operate the EPR reactor in normal conditions are too closely interconnected with the safety systems that would take over under extraordinary circumstances.

<snip>

But in a letter to EDF's head of nuclear engineering, the head of the French regulator Jean-Christophe Niel said there was "no certainty it will be possible to prove an acceptable level of safety based on the current architecture."

<snip>

Read more: http://www.france24.com/en/20091103-nuclear-energy-epr-reactors-france-finland-areva-safety-concern



Al Gore and Amory Lovins proven right again - new reactors are expensive and take a long time to build.
These new reactor designs still only exist on paper - more problems will be found.
Efficiency and renewables are cheaper and faster to bring online.
Burning coal while wasting time and money trying to build new nuclear plants will just make global warming worse.
Republicans are trying to water down the climate bill by forcing these expensive dinosaurs on us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-03-09 10:32 AM
Response to Original message
1. Amory Lovins, Walmart shill, you mean?
The guy who's paid by massive environment-despoiling corporations to greenwash them and pretend like they're okay for the envionment because they bolted a couple solar panels onto the roof of a store in Des Moines? That guy? :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-03-09 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. No, that's the creation of Nuclear Shills.
The nuclear INDUSTRY hates Lovins with a passion and in keeping with their lack of an ethical foundation, they do everything possible to smear his name.

Amory Lovins
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Amory Lovins
Born November 13, 1947, Washington, DC
Occupation environmentalist, physicist

Amory Bloch Lovins (born November 13, 1947 in Washington, DC) is Chairman and Chief Scientist of the Rocky Mountain Institute. His four decades of work spans and integrates energy policy, resources, security, economy, environment, and development.

Lovins worked professionally as an environmentalist in the 1970s and since then as an analyst of and advocate for a "soft energy path" for the United States and other nations. He has promoted energy efficiency, the use of renewable energy sources, and the generation of energy at or near the site where the energy is actually used. Lovins has also advocated a "negawatt revolution" arguing that utility customers don’t want kilowatt-hours of electricity; they want energy services. In the 1990s, his work with Rocky Mountain Institute included the design of an ultra-efficient automobile, the Hypercar.

Lovins has received ten honorary doctorates and won many awards. He has provided expert testimony in eight countries and more than 20 US states, briefed 19 heads of state, and published 29 books. These books include Winning the Oil Endgame, Small is Profitable, Factor Four, and Natural Capitalism...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amory_Lovins




Amory Lovins coined the term "soft energy path".

Soft vs Hard

The "soft energy path" assumes that energy is but a means to social ends, and is not an end in itself. Soft energy paths involve efficient use of energy, diversity of energy production methods (matched in scale and quality to end uses), and special reliance on co-generation and "soft energy technologies" such as solar energy, wind energy, biofuels, geothermal energy, etc.

The "hard energy path" (with which the soft path contrasts) is based on the assumption that the more energy we use the better off we are. It involves inefficient liquid-fuel automotive transport, as well as giant, centralized electricity-generating facilities, often burning fossil fuels (e.g., coal or petroleum) or harnessing nuclear power. The hard path is not simply a matter of energy sources, though, because it is greatly augmented and complicated by wastage and loss of electricity and other common, directly usable forms of energy.

Lovins explained that the most profound difference between the soft and hard paths -- the difference that ultimately distinguishes them -- is their different socio-political impact. Both paths entail social change, "but the kinds of social change for a hard path are apt to be less pleasant, less plausible, less compatible with social diversity and freedom of choice, and less consistent with traditional values than are the social changes which could make a soft path work".<1>
Soft energy technologies
Main article: Soft energy technologies
Solar energy technologies, such as solar water heaters, located on or near the buildings which they supply with energy, are a prime example of a soft energy technology.

Soft energy technologies (appropriate renewables) have five defining characteristics. They (1) rely on renewable energy resources, (2) are diverse and designed for maximum effectiveness in particular circumstances, (3) are flexible and relatively simple to understand, (4) are matched to end-use needs in terms of scale, and (5) are matched to end-use needs in terms of quality.<2><3>

Residential solar energy technologies are prime examples of soft energy technologies and rapid deployment of simple, energy conserving, residential solar energy technologies is fundamental to a soft energy strategy. Active residential solar technologies use special devices to collect and convert the sun's rays to useful energy and are located near the users they supply. Passive residential solar technologies involve the natural transfer (by radiation, convection and conduction) of solar energy without the use of mechanical devices.<4>

Lovins argued that besides environmental benefits, global political stresses might be reduced by Western nations committing to the soft energy path. In general, soft path impacts are seen to be more "gentle, pleasant and manageable" than hard path impacts. These impacts range from the individual and household level to those affecting the very fabric of society at the national and international level.<5>

Lovins recognised that major energy decisions are always implemented gradually and incrementally, and that major shifts take decades. A chief element of the soft path strategy is to avoid major commitments to inflexible infrastructure that locks us into particular supply patterns for decades.<6>

The following transitional strategy to a soft energy path has been proposed:<7>

* Double the efficiency of oil utilization, mainly through improved vehicle design (the development of improved hybrid cars, ultralight designs, and streamlined large transport vehicles).

* Apply creative business models which focus on certain advanced technologies and lightweight materials.

* Substitute 25% of U.S. oil needs via a major domestic biofuels industry, which could result in an economic boost for the rural regions that would supply the plant material for biofuels.

* Make natural gas again abundant and affordable through wider utilization of well-established efficiency techniques.

Lovins argues that the barriers to soft energy paths are not technical, nor in any fundamental sense economic. He suggests that are mainly institutional, and relate to obsolete building codes, an innovation-resistant building industry, promotional utility rate structures, inapproriate tax and mortgage policies, imperfect access to capital markets and fragmentation of government responsibilities.<8>

Lovins wrote in 1977 that "a largely or wholly solar economy can be constructed in the United States with straightforward soft technologies that are now demonstrated and now economic or nearly economic".<9>

The soft energy path is already coming to pass. As of 2007, America's total energy consumption is actually running lower than predicted in Lovin's 1976 soft path scenario. Soft technologies were delayed by official hinderances, but improved energy efficiency has more than made up the difference.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_energy_path
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NickB79 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-03-09 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. So, does Lovins work for Walmart or not?
And is Walmart a disingenuous greenwashing company or not?

I noticed you never addressed that in your cut-n-paste response.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-03-09 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. That logic is right up there with condeming Gore because he invests in green technology companies
Edited on Tue Nov-03-09 03:11 PM by kristopher
Lovins has been working with WalMart to double the fuel efficiency of their trucking fleet. He also works with other large corporations that are some of the worst polluters around.

So what? Are you seriously asserting that being successful at getting companies to take action that helps the environment is something he (or anyone) should avoid doing because it might be labeled as "greenwashing"? Somehow the logic of that escapes the bonds of reason. The fact is that the smear on his character above is prompted by Lovins' very vocal rejection of the entire system that nuclear power symbolizes.

“We decided decades ago that in a world with three main foci of power and action—business, civil society and government—we would get the most done by working with the private sector,” Lovins says. Along with Texas Instruments, RMI clients include Monsanto, Royal Dutch/Shell and the mining giant Anglo American, all considered the enemy by many environmental groups. RMI has made headlines recently by helping Wal-Mart with plans to double the fuel efficiency of its 6800-strong trucking fleet—among the biggest in the world—by 2015. The program could save the company upward of $300 million dollars per year and cut CO2 emissions by 690,000 tons annually. The 800-pound retail gorilla could end up causing the entire trucking industry to follow its lead.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/industry/4224757.html?page=1&series=37

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-03-09 10:39 AM
Response to Original message
2. But, they promised us atomic power so cheap and safe we could chuck the meters and drive atom cars?!
Edited on Tue Nov-03-09 10:40 AM by leveymg
I want my atomic car, now!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ensho Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-03-09 10:48 AM
Response to Original message
3. kick
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 06:57 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC