Access to Energy

WHY LOVINS LOVES THEM

The nukettes producing district heat are interesting form yet another aspect beyond their safety. They are Lovins' dream come true: They conserve energy (generating energy from uranium, which has no other uses, is surely the ultimate in energy conservation); they do not use heat for electricity to be reconverted into heat; they have an efficiency close to 100%, certainly closer than any solar furnace could achieve; they are local, decentralized energy sources; and running on nuclear fuel, they are renewable¾in fact at the prices Mr Lovins is willing to pay for solar energy, they are super-renewable, for their fuel supply will outlast the life of the sun [AtE Dec 80]. That is why one would expect Lovins, the great free marketeer and physicist, to welcome the idea of nuclear district heating. (He doesn't?)

And we have more news for him. Dr. Ferdinand Cap, professor of theoretical physics at the University of Innsbruck, Austria, has analyzed the problem of time in introducing new energy technologies. The rate at which new power plants can be built to replace oil-fired ones depends, among other factors, on the energetic break-even time (the time necessary to repay the energy invested in the materials and construction of the plant) and on the energy yield (energy produced per energy invested). Unlike energy genius Lovins, who is able to concoct transition strategies out of thin air, Prof. Cap is forced to use differential equations with experimentally measured constants.

What he finds is that the most advantageous strategy of building new power plants is using the energy of the fossils now at our disposal for the construction of hydroelectric and nuclear plants; this is about 50 times better than the next most favorable strategy of constructing more fossil-fired plants. The least favorable is solar power; its break-even time (in Central Europe) is 38 years, and even under the most optimistic assumptions it is questionable whether the energy could be paid back over the next 50 years.

[Source: Preprint made available by private communication.]

* * SCIENTIST'S PLEA, BUREAUCRAT'S REPLY * *

Dr Andrew Hull [of Brookhaven National Lab] to NRC:

[With regard to restart of TMI Unit 1] I write on the basis of my two decades of experience as a health physicist, with a particular interest in reactor related environmental radiation and an avocational interest in risk assessment, to urge a prompt favorable decision ... Insofar as the issue revolves around health and safety, the production of power by alternative fossil plants would appear to produce a greater risk to their surrounding populations than would the production of this power by TMI-1, so that in a sense the local residents are exporting this greater risk of the power they are using onto other more distant persons.

(Gist of) NRC's reply to Dr Hull (3/3/81):

...While we are, of course, concerned about financial impacts on consumers and stockholders, the NRC's primary responsibility is the assurance of public health and safety... Your comments and interest in this matter are appreciated. Herbert N. Berkow, Chief Management Analysis Branch, Planning and Program Analysis Staff, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, US Nuclear...



 • The soft path of the brass knuckles
 • INHERENT SAFETY
 • FROM MICRO TO MINI
 • WHY LOVINS LOVES THEM
 • CLEAN COAL, DIRTY AIR
 • 1980 DATA JUST IN
 • GOOD READING
Vol. 8, No. 9

Newsletter: Access to Energy Newsletter Archive
Volume: Issues
Issue/No.: Vol. 8, No. 9

Date: November 23, 2004 10:35 AM (For actual publication date see newsletter.)
Title: The soft path of the brass knuckles

Copyright © 2004 - Access to Energy Newsletter Archive
All rights reserved.