WUEG April 2015 Newsletter

an 84% capacity rate, so power plants are
producing at full capacity almost all the time.
In addition, having such a massive portion of a
country’s electricity occasionally be generated
by solar is damaging to other forms of power
production. When a single source varies from
50% of production to nothing at night, other
plants need to compensate. This cycling of
plants means nuclear (which varies its
production over multiple days) cannot be part
of the energy mix, so the other 95% of total
daily production must come from gas and coal.
The growing international consensus is that
“Energiewende is the worst possible example
of how to implement an energy transition. The
overzealous push for the wrong generation
technology has hurt citizens, businesses, and
the environment all at the same time.” The
German investment plan has caused higher
energy imports, Germany’s highest coal usage
in twenty years, and its highest electricity prices
ever.
We must instead follow China’s lead. The
Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) has built a
new nuclear research center in Shanghai with
450 Scientists, with 300 more to be hired over
the next year. Comparatively speaking, Penn
currently has 113 faculty in the engineering
school. CAS’s mission is not to build existing
nuclear reactors, but innovate with novel fuels
(Thorium), coolants (liquified salt) and plant
designs (putting reactors underground, or
floating on the ocean). China’s focus on solving
their electricity problem is commendable, and
will make China the intellectual leaders on
nuclear power for years. Meanwhile, the US
government instead is reducing grant
programs to develop new low cost ‘Small
Modular Reactors’.
Nuclear poses a moral dichotomy. Humans can
now split atoms in half, unleashing massive
power that we harvest in giant, complex
reactors. The energy harvested drives our
industry, our offices, and our homes. Should
this complex process go wrong, the entire
country suffers, yet in the history of the world,
only three reactors have malfunctioned.
Advocates state that in terms of deaths per
kilowatt, Nuclear is considered the safest form
of energy available to the world. The
argument states that proliferation risks are
reduced due to new fuels and international
protocols. They cite the tiny amount of
radioactive waste, and increasingly effective
storage techniques as making the waste point
moot. Power produced from nuclear reactors is
incredibly cheap and reliable over the entire
lifetime of the plant.
More importantly, the spectre of climate
change looms large. As the battle between
anti-nuclear and anti-carbon advocates rages,
carbon dioxide is rapidly causing the earth to
alter its basic processes. Nuclear power offers
a simple, easy solution to this problem, directly
replacing gas and coal plants with carbon-free
electricity production. Solar and wind are a
useful part of the energy mix, but nuclear
power could be the country’s solution. Public
apathy and misinformation are fueling the antinuclear
contingent. Scientists and