Obama has made nuclear energy a centerpiece of his climate push. In reality, nuclear is NOT a low-carbon source of energy … and funding nuclear crowds out the development of better sources of alternative energy. Mark Jacobson – the head of Stanford University’s Atmosphere and Energy Program, who has written numerous books and hundreds of scientific papers on climate and energy, and testified before Congress numerous times on those issues – notes that nuclear puts out much more pollution (including much more CO2) than windpower, and 1.5% of all the nuclear plants built have melted down. Jacobson alsopoints out that it takes at least 11 years to permit and build a nuclear plant, whereas it takes less than half that time to fire up a wind or solar farm. Between the application for a nuclear plant and flipping the switch, power is provided by conventional energy sources … currently 55-65% coal. Read
Marc Allen is my guest who has written the book “Tantra for the West“. It’s a wonderful book to help live in the deeper truths of life. It’s a lot easier when you have greater awareness and tools to handle life’s challenges and be able to make better choices. This interview can really help travel through life better.
Project Censored Show host Mickey Huff covers The Myth of Clean and Safe Nuclear Technologies-- Holding the Nuclear Industry Responsible for Environmental Contamination and Human Disease. The show begins in discussion with Choi Seungkoo, Secretary General of the NNAA (No Nukes Asia Actions) and activist Rev. Daesoo Lee, they discuss recent international lawsuits andcompensation for cancer victims created by nuclear power plants and the dangers of nuclear technology past to present...they are currently touring in the US to raise awareness about this growing global affair; at the bottom of the hour, author and professor Karl Grossman discusses the many dangers of nuclear power in the US from nuclear weapons to NASA, and from the weaponization of space to power plants built on fault lines near major cities…join us for an hour on the perils of nuclear technology, who is responsible, and what we can do about it...from Fukushima to Indian Point and beyond.
In what is being called the most definitive assessment yet of national emissions pledges aimed at meeting global climate goals, the International Energy Agency on Monday released a major report showing that without “learning to live within its means,” the world is set to miss a critical target. In its World Energy Outlook Special Report 2015: Energy and Climate Change (pdf), the Paris-based agency states that current national commitments to cut greenhouse gases are still insufficient to keep the world below two degrees Celsius of warming above pre-industrial levels. That generally accepted target, beyond which climate change is likely to become catastrophic and irreversible, was reaffirmed by G7 leaders in Bonn last week. “The world must quickly learn to live within its means if this generation is to pass it on to the next with a clear conscience.” —International Energy Agency However, the IEA’s assessment of “known and signaled national climate pledges for COP21″—the detailed plans submitted ahead of this December’s meeting where it is hoped that 196 countries will agree upon new global emissions reductions—found that without stronger action, emissions will continue to rise until at least 2030, putting the 2°C target out of reach. It doesn’t have to be this way. To meet the target, the agency
Converting the world’s entire energy infrastructure to run on clean, renewable energy could effectively fight ongoing climate change, eliminate air pollution deaths, create jobs, and stabilize energy prices. The challenge is a daunting one. But scientists say it’s possible. Researchers are the first to outline the 50 individual state plans that call for aggressive changes to both infrastructure and the ways we currently consume energy, but indicate that the conversion is technically and economically possible through wide-scale implementation of existing technologies. “The main barriers are social, political, and getting industries to change,” says Mark Z. Jacobson, professor of civil and environmental engineering at Stanford University. “One way to overcome the barriers is to inform people about what is possible. By showing that it’s technologically and economically possible, this study could reduce the barriers to a large scale transformation.” ENERGY DEMANDS Researchers started by taking a close look at the current energy demands of each state, and how those demands would change under business-as-usual conditions by the year 2050. To create a full picture of energy use in each state, they examined energy usage in four sectors: residential, commercial, industrial, and transportation. Read
Wired put together a very interesting piece on the renewable energy company Vortex. They are now field testing bladeless wind energy turbines. Instead of capturing energy via the circular motion of a propeller, the Vortex takes advantage of what’s known as vorticity, an aerodynamic effect that produces a pattern of spinning vortices. Vorticity has long been considered the enemy of architects and engineers, who actively try to design their way around these whirlpools of wind. And for good reason: With enough wind, vorticity can lead to an oscillating motion in structures, which, in some cases, like the Tacoma Narrows Bridge, can cause their eventual collapse Using the energy created by the oscillation in structures has been covered on Daily Kos long before I came here. As with previous iterations of minimal moving parts and gearless wind turbines, the Vortex version may offer up a variety of advances to wind technology that arenot possible with today’s wind turbines. Its makers boast the fact that there are no gears, bolts, or mechanically moving parts, which they say makes the Vortex cheaper to manufacture and maintain. The founders claim their Vortex Mini, which stands at around 41 feet tall, can capture up to 40 percent of the
Denmark has distinguished itself as the country moving the fastest toward the eventual replacement of fossil fuels. Its goal of 100 percent renewable energy by 2050 is laudable, but the assumption that this path will reverse global warming while otherwise continuing business as usual, is unrealistic. At first glance, Denmark has made remarkable strides. The country’s intention to totally eliminate fossil fuels by the midpoint of the 21st century appears to be realistic. Already, Denmark is the world leader in wind energy and it intends to also exclude all use of nuclear power. At the start of 2015, the country’s energy agency, Energistyrelsen, said renewable energy sources account for 25 percent of Denmark’s total energy consumption, and more than 40 percent of its electricity comes from renewable sources. The Danish government acknowledges that continuing consumption patterns based on “cheap and easy access to coal, oil and natural gas” is a “road [that] is not an option.” True enough. But the switch to renewable energy is promoted as cost-free. The Danish government says: “Business … stands a great chance to move into the heavy league of successful super green companies. For instance, the energy efficiency measures a company makes are often paid back within
NEVER HAVE SO MANY, DONE SO MUCH, TO ACHIEVE SO LITTLE!
Greg Mello of the Los Alamos Study Group joins Chuck McCune of Prizm Foundation (sitting in for Host Sandy Leon-Vest) for an in-depth discussion on energy, global instability, nuclear weapons, conservation, environment, sustainability, white privilege resource consumption, and expected converging disasters.
China’s increased trade and investment in Latin America over the past decade has resulted in powerful social and environmental impacts such as job losses and pollution, although the growing relationship has also brought some benefits, says new research published today. The high concentration of Chinese activity in Latin America’s agriculture and extractive sectors has placed a heavy strain on water supplies, increased deforestation and greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) and is aggravating local concerns about resource use and job creation, the study coordinated by Boston University’s Global Economic Governance Initiative (GEGI) concludes. But the paper, entitled China in Latin America: Lessons for South-South Cooperation and Sustainable Development also highlights the potential for cooperation on renewable energy projects. Read
Don’t hold your breath, but future historians may look back on 2015 as the year that the renewable energy ascendancy began, the moment when the world started to move decisively away from its reliance on fossil fuels. Those fuels — oil, natural gas, and coal — will, of course, continue to dominate the energy landscape for years to come, adding billions of tons of heat-trapping carbon to the atmosphere. For the first time, however, it appears that a shift to renewable energy sources is gaining momentum. If sustained, it will have momentous implications for the world economy — as profound as the shift from wood to coal or coal to oil in previous centuries. Global economic growth has, of course, long been powered by an increasing supply of fossil fuels, especially petroleum. Beginning with the United States, countries that succeeded in mastering the extraction and utilization of oil gained immense economic and political power, while countries with huge reserves of oil to exploit and sell, like Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, became fabulously wealthy. The giant oil companies that engineered the rise of petroleum made legendary profits, accumulated vast wealth, and grew immensely powerful. Not surprisingly, the oil states and those