Nuclear power
A year after Fukushima, the
future for nuclear power is not bright—for reasons of cost as much as safety
The world are interested in the situation
of Japan. We should explain or state our opinion on nuclear technology. The
article explains from the view of cost and benefit logically.
Discussion: Should we still
struggle with nuclear innovation or design regulation to stimulate shifting
from nuclear technology?
Nuclear technology was once thought to be a
technology that makes our dream comes true providing a cheap, plentiful,
reliable and safe source of electricity for centuries to come. But it has not.
Our conclusion that the industry was “safe as a chocolate factory” proves to
be a myth.
Safety requirements: (1) good engineering
(2) independent regulation, (3) a meticulous, self-critical safety culture.
Independent regulation is harder when the
industry being regulated exists largely by government fiat（法令）. ó Without governments private companies would simply not choose to
build nuclear-power plants.
This is in part because of (1) the risks
they face from local opposition and changes in government policy. But it is
mostly because (2) reactors are very expensive indeed. In America, shale
gas has slashed the cost of alternatives
For nuclear to play a greater role:
(1) it must get cheaper or (2) others must
get more expensive. A carbon tax makes the second option more promising but in
practice doesn’t.
Innovation is possible but for innovation
such as small reactors it needs a large market in which to compete against each
other. But such a market does not exist.
0 件のコメント:
コメントを投稿