Kenya Seeks Nuclear Power Infrastructure 180
New submitter Snirt writes "Kenya is seeking to develop a viable nuclear energy program within the next 15 years to meet its growing energy demands. A government commission formed last year is conducting a feasibility study and the University of Nairobi is setting up programs to train people for the nuclear program. Critics say they're concerned about plant worker safety and the risk of environmental contamination. Some 86 percent of Kenyans do not have access to electricity, relying on firewood and kerosene to meet their energy needs. Electricity is expensive(1$=KES 90), and the supply is limited."
Expensive? (Score:2)
A standard two room aparment here in Sweden would cost 120 KES + 2KES/KWh*2000KWh per year, that's 50 bucks!
Re: (Score:2)
Ooopsie sorry that should be: 120 KES + 9KES/KWh*2000KWh, 200 bucks I wonder if you can make by with 50KWh per year.
Re:Expensive? (Score:5, Informative)
Any problem?
GDP per capita (PPP)
Sweden: $38,204
Yemen: $2,700
Kenya: $1,711
Re:Expensive? (Score:5, Informative)
My friend gets by with one light bulb in the lounge. He's usually using 1-2kWh per month. I think he's about average for Nairobi suburbia. Some households might have a TV and fridge. And a few more light bulbs on at once.
Re:Expensive? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Expensive? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Expensive? (Score:5, Informative)
The exact opposite really: they want to fall into a lower energy state from which they cannot escape. Being free costs energy.
Re: (Score:2)
So the energy wants to be free then.
More energy may help improve economy (Score:5, Insightful)
More to the point, I believe the thinking is that having a large supply of reliable, and relatively affordable power may help strongly stimulate the Kenyan economy, thus making it so that a lot more people can afford the electricity.
We know that energy is used to make stuff, transport it, and preserve it. It follows that access to affordable energy is required for any economy to grow. Too often our discussions about energy revolve around "creature comforts", but this is about more important things than air conditioning, televisions, and computers.
Re: (Score:2)
My friend gets by with one light bulb in the lounge. He's usually using 1-2kWh per month. I think he's about average for Nairobi suburbia. Some households might have a TV and fridge. And a few more light bulbs on at once.
If electricity is that expensive in Nariobi send him one of those energy efficient spiral shaped CF-bulbs or a LED-bulb. A 20W CF-bulb will give you the same amount of light as a 100W incandescent bulb and the CF-bulbs last longer. If he is using a 60W incandescent bulb now switching wold cut his electricity bill noticeably.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. I can't but fathom the determination of the Kenyans as they plough through their daily lives with multiple TV's, gaming consoles, computers, kitchen appliances and hybrid pluggable vehicles. I bet a sizable amount of Kenyans have a multiple kilowatt solarium installed for the days when the sun is momentarily behind a cloud.
Anyway, per the GDP your current electric bill in Sweden should be multiplied by 22.5 to make it equal to the share of the Kenyans. So yes, it's expensive.
Re: (Score:2)
The electricity isn't expensive, the Kenyans are poor. Nuclear power isn't going to help here, since they already have cheap power.
Made in Kenya? (Score:5, Insightful)
The electricity isn't expensive, the Kenyans are poor.
I'd imagine that the Kenyans are poor only because they don't make goods for export. The Balassa-Samuelson model [wikipedia.org] explains how lack of an export sector depresses the value of a currency.
How much do they import? (Score:2)
I would think a vital part of that model would be how much a country has to import, whether what you are importing is natural resources (fuel, raw materials), or finished products. If you import more than you export, you'll probably end up broke, no?
I mean, theoretically, if a country had sufficient resources, they could be completely self-sustaining with no exports at all (though very few countries have access to every resource they need).
Anyhow, I do agree with you generally - exports are good, to help yo
Re: (Score:2)
So the standard of living in Sweden is higher than Kenya?
Re:Expensive? (Score:5, Insightful)
Care to try your napkin calculation again?
120 KES base rate /KWh for 1500 to 2000 KWh = 500x18.57= 9285
2 KES / KWh for the first 50 KWh = 2x50=100 KES
8.10 KES / KWh for 50 to 1500 KWh = 1500x8.10=11745
18.57 KES
Total cost of this hypothetical 2000 KWh /year use is: 21250 KES
21250 KES is roughly $245 US or 192 Euro
Now put that in perspective... this is a country where the average salary for an average job is about 15000 to 20000 KES per month (if you dont' believe me, then look at the job postings for Nairobi on websites such as http://www.bestjobskenya.com/ [bestjobskenya.com] You can get better paying jobs, but even top manager jobs top out around 80k/month). Imagine you were working an average job in Nairobi, and paying a little over one month of your before tax salary for electricity. Say you earn an average of about 35,000 Euro per year in Europe - then think about paying around 3000 Euro per year for your electricity. That's a significant portion of your take home pay. The same applies in Kenya. Electricity is VERY expensive relative to income... so much so that the vast majority cannot afford it, or cannot afford it except for only the most critical things (say charging a mobile phone (phones are super cheap in Kenya as is airtime) or running a single refrigerator).
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't work like that, If you can consume 2000kWh per year you live a pretty decent life, and you will make a lot more than the median family income in Kenya. But If your family do earn ~40 USD per month you can probably pay ~3 USD per year that 50kWh would cost you, that is insanely cheap. Though I'm guessing the installation price is at least 600 USD.. :-(
I have lived in similar circumstances so I do know what I'm talking about, and if you take the lowest tier 50kWh, with that you can keep you food s
Re: (Score:2)
My combined fuel costs (gas and electric) in the UK was around 5% of my income after tax until I started a new job last week. That was on an above average salary as well.
Re: (Score:2)
You sure it wasn't taxes? You pay about a buck a liter in petrol taxes over there, plus VAT - roughly doubles the price. I don't know about electricity - but I do know that you pay some carbon tax on that.
Re: (Score:3)
You sure it wasn't taxes? You pay about a buck a liter in petrol taxes over there, plus VAT - roughly doubles the price. I don't know about electricity - but I do know that you pay some carbon tax on that.
FYI, for most fuel and electricity the only tax is VAT (20% at the moment). The Climate Change Levy (about 0.5p/kWh for electricity, quite a bit lower for natural gas) doesn't apply to domestic consumers at all (well, except indirectly through higher general prices). Vehicle fuel attracts much higher taxes.
Proximity to Somalian pirates... Sigh. (Score:4, Insightful)
Proximity to the Somali pirates (http://www.google.com/search?q=somali+pirates)... Sigh.
How fun isn't that compared to other nuclear wielding states.
Still, "Kenya optimistic for Somali peace prospects": http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2012-01/09/content_14405037.htm [chinadaily.com.cn]
Four killed in rocket attack on vehicle in Kenya (Score:2)
Bribes within Kenya is a concern. But the Somali border is even more worrying
"Four killed in rocket attack on vehicle in Kenya"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/kenya/8852743/Four-killed-in-rocket-attack-on-vehicle-in-Kenya.html [telegraph.co.uk]
"Somalia's president has criticised Kenya's military invasion of his country, raising fears of a split in support for the mission to hunt down al-Qaeda-linked Islamists"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/kenya/8848537/Somalias- [telegraph.co.uk]
Re:Four killed in rocket attack on vehicle in Keny (Score:4, Insightful)
Bribes within Kenya is a concern. But the Somali border is even more worrying
True. Moreover, brazen attacks by Somali bandits in Kenya are scaring away the tourist trade, which makes a sizable dent in the country's finances. Tourism had already been hit by the violence after the 2008 elections, but recent events, like the kidnappings of foreign tourists in Lamu, have made it even worse. It's really a pity because Kenya is a beautiful country(*) , and it has followed a fairly responsible path of conservation and sustainable use of their natural resources (especially compared to other African countries).
(*) Seriously, if you're planning a vacation, consider an African safari. It's a very special experience. Kenya, Tanzania, South Africa are good places, and the price isn't as exorbitant as you'd expect.
Feasibility study for the full process from mining (Score:2)
TL;DR -- what is the feasibility study going to study? Are they going to check for the possibility of tsunamis in Kenya?
Definition of irony (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Definition of irony (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Definition of irony (Score:4, Insightful)
An intelligent combination of capacitors, solar power, wind power, and so on can make a difference.
so, in Germany you have super-capacitors ?
How many billion € are you spending yearly to get less than 5% of consumption from "renewables" ? How many hundreds of € are you personally paying each month to maintain the "renewables" (look at your electricity bills and fuel bills, and see how much of that is taxes ) ? ... think a bit about it and you might realize that it's just what in US is very politely called "pork": corporate welfare for the 1%-ers.
Re:Definition of irony (Score:4, Interesting)
If you wanted to design a country to be no good for renewables, you'd come up with Germany.
Long winter - solar's out.
Short coastline - wave power out.
Long way from atlantic - less wind - turbines out
Few mountains, mostly in one area - hydroelectric out
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Lol, I'm from Germany, and
> Long winter - solar's out
That's what pumped-storage hydroelectricity is for. And having your CSP plants in one of the southern neighbor countries, like spain or even north Aftica. Look up "project Desertec".
> Short coast line - wave power out.
Wave power is about the dumbest "green" energy source anyway. Also, you underestimate the space those things would need.
> Long way from atlantic - less wind - turbines out.
Then why the hell are our countrysides (lots of flat areas w
Re: (Score:3)
How many billion € are you spending yearly to get less than 5% of consumption
It's only euros. There are plenty of euros, and Germany can afford it. When the crunch comes, a mere 5% will make all the difference in the world. The Germans are being smart. They are survivors.
20%, not 5 (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Or...
They will just buy electricity from France.
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't the preciousness of water also make boiling water in those turbines a bit costly too? If you add condensers you can cut your losses dramatically, but that adds to the cost.
Re:Definition of irony (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Definition of irony (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
I'm a fan of Thorium too, but lets be realistic - Kenya isn't likely to be pioneering new technology. They probably won't be building it all (well, maybe some local labor might get hired, and some local contractors used for some things). Most likely, what's going to happen, is they hire a nuclear firm from another country, like France, Russia, China, India, S. Korea, The US, Canada, etc to come build a reactor for them.
If they are looking to build a new reactor in the next 20 years, then I suspect the most
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Nuclear energy is as clean as the sun. After all, the sun emits the same radioactivity as nuclear does - gamma rays, cosmic rays, among others, but what happens is that the higher frequency radiation converts the oxygen in the ionosphere into ozone, which absorbs gamma and cosmic rays even more. So on earth, one would get the same energy, but available closer, and the focus is less on efficiencies of panels, but more on containment of the by-products. And as I mentioned a
Re: (Score:2)
If a solar or wind generator gets destroyed by an earthquake, it doesn't render the entire area uninhabitable.
When people compare the costs of various methods of making energy, they usually consider the scenarios where everything works like it's supposed to - they don't think about the costs of catastrophic failure. Which is bound to happen sooner or later.
Re:Definition of irony (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
People tend to misestimate the scale.
The average solar power per area in Germany is about half of that in Kenia. Solar power prices are falling by 8% each year for 30 years now. At that rate any ROI achieved in Kenia will be achieved in Germany 9 years later. While this is a good reason to built solar plants in Kenia first, the difference in location is almost irrelevant when comparing to nuclear power: 2nd generation nuclear plants are designed to operate for 60 years. A 9 year shift therefore is only a 15
Re: (Score:2)
The Germans should just ship their nuclear plants to Kenya! Problem solved!
At least somebody is making sense (Score:2)
At least some people see what's going on and what must be done, and those who talk about energy independence and those who talk about the environment cannot escape the reality - nuclear is the way forward and the way to achieve it is to do a lot of it, so that more experience can be gained and more new technologies can be worked on and eventually we must have our nuclear powered cars.
Re:At least somebody is making sense (Score:5, Insightful)
Agreed, except that your nuclear-powered car is already here today and it is called "electric rail".
Re: (Score:2)
I am not hauling train cars and I like to drive from point of exit to point of destination, so no, there is no 'electric car' because there is no infrastructure. I want a nuclear powered car, independent of the grid.
Re: (Score:2)
It won't happen unless some kind of Mad Max crisis comes along.
As of now multiple countries are giving up nuclear power PLANTS and TSA molesters are checking people boarding BUSES and you think they'll let anyone have a cheap portable nuclear reactor capable of 100 mph+ ?
Now that we're dreaming I remember I wanted my flying car too (probably a transporter would work just as well). And a holodeck, yes, that would help!
Re: (Score:2)
Plus, radioactive waste is not an issue w/ Thorium the way it is w/ Uranium. Problem was that Uranium's by-product is Thorium, which has a half-life of 75,000 yrs, which is why Yucca Mountain is such an i
Re: (Score:2)
right, and it's not going to happen until the people take the freedoms back from government officials and start investigating in this area due to a possible payoff. Anybody coming up with a workable solution will become wealthier than all people combined.
Re: (Score:2)
However, problem is not freedom from government officials. Problem is that a majority of people, if offered the chance to vote on this on ballot propositions in any state, will heavily vote it down. People ain't going to hear Thorium or anything else - all they'll hear
Re: (Score:2)
So much stupid...
Fissioning thorium produces a wide range of radioactive daughter elements just as fissioning uranium and plutonium does. Radioactive decay is a different process -- it produces little energy in comparison and is only used in RTGs for spacecraft and other low-power applications.
As for non-proliferation the proposed liquid-fluorine thorium reactors (LFTRs) have to continuously process the fuel stream to prevent it creating U-233 which works fine as a nuclear weapon core. The other thoriu
Isn't it obvious? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
TIA. Minority tribes in their country perhaps?
Re: (Score:2)
They are neither an Islamic nor Communist country
Yet. Give the CIA some time.
Re: (Score:2)
CIA backed coup in 3,2,1...
Go Solar (Score:3, Informative)
Kenya should probably go solar since it scales better at the small end, requires less transmission infrastructure. It is interesting that it doesn't seem to have much more sunlight than many American cities, at least according to casual web search:
http://www.climatetemp.info/kenya/ [climatetemp.info]
http://www.currentresults.com/Weather/US/average-annual-sunshine-by-city.php [currentresults.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Those links don't include anything about the intensity of sunlight, which is a very important factor in generating electricity from solar. They probably can generate more electricity per acre than US cities that have more clear hours of sunlight.
Re: (Score:2)
Solar is getting cheaper by about 10 percent a year, and has been for decades. And there is no reason to think it will be any different in the future. This cannot be said of any other form of energy.
And it has reached grid parity already in many places where incremental costs of additional capacity are high (like India).
Btw, I find your ignorance AND your rudeness appalling.
Well then... (Score:3)
The issue is infrastructure (Score:5, Informative)
The sun is not our only asset. Already a significant proportion of our power comes from hydroelectric and geothermal plants, and there is scope for (and investment happening in) much more.
The biggest problem we face is not sourcing energy, but in dealing with the huge inefficiencies and rickety infrastructure that we currently have. Here in Nairobi have power cuts several times a week (not because of lack of supply, but because of regular failures in the poorly maintained grid). As it happens, the transformer right outside my home has exploded (literally) and been replaced four times in the last three months. Most businesses in Nairobi have invested in back up generators because the supply is so unreliable.
One major obstacle to real improvement is the fact that the Kenya Power and Lighting Company operates a monopoly on electricity sales in Kenya, and there is no incentive for it to reduce costs and improve infrastructure. They posted record profits in 2011, at the same time as electricity prices in the country reached record highs.
A Kenyan perspective (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
"They're using nuclear power as a front for developing weapons of mass destruction" - As a country that has suffered a terrorist attack on more than one occassion, why? In bad taste this. (Kenyan)
I think this is a joke aimed at percieved US paranoia and not at Kenya, ie., the idea that any country outside the "first world" that is interested in nuclear power must actually be hiding a weapons development program
Re: (Score:3)
The article mentions the Kenyan people are concerned about the risks of nuclear power. Not surprising at all after the Japanese accident this past year.
Have they considered partnering with anyone to develop and deploy some of the non-uranium technologies that are being developed by companies like Fuji with their work on Thorium Molten Salt Reactors? It's a much safer design than uranium systems, and proven to work in the 1960s. I don't know how close Fuji is to shipping them, but maybe they're close e
Re: (Score:2)
Solar is unsuitable for base load, since its production capacity varies with time of day and the weather. Unless you're willing to invest $billions (if not $trillions) in batteries or pumped storage, you need some other sources of energy with an on/off switch.
Re: (Score:2)
People really confuse making nuclear weapons with nuclear reactors for some odd reason.
A light water nuclear reactor is not a good technology for making nuclear weapons. A thorium based reactor is even worse.
Nuclear is most expensive option (Score:3, Insightful)
if Kenya wants cheap electricity, then nuclear is the worst option. It only appears cheap because of massive government subsidies.
According to a report by the Union of Concerned Scientists:
"Government subsidies to the nuclear power industry over the past fifty years have been so large in proportion to the value of the energy produced that in some cases it would have cost taxpayers less to simply buy kilowatts on the open market and give them away"
http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear_power/nuclear_power_and_global_warming/nuclear-power-subsidies-report.html [ucsusa.org]
Re: (Score:2)
How does this differ from the subsidies given to green alternatives such as wind and solar? Power generation infrastructure is expensive and subsidy is the only way to move away from the cheaper fossil fuel methods.
Re: (Score:2)
> How does this differ from the subsidies given to green alternatives such as wind and solar?
they are much larger and more hidden
Used solar (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nuclear is expensive here because of environmental and legal concerns. It could well be a completely different animal in more liberal countries that are willing to take on higher risks.
Re: (Score:2)
Higher risks in this case meaning destruction of clean water supplies and arable land, two things that Kenya isn't exactly brimming with in the first place.
1 Kilowatt per child? (Score:3)
Maybe we should start sending folks in Africa electricity, instead of gadgets that use electricity?
African Space Program (Score:2)
In a previous post I made an erroneous referral to an East African space program - http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2610112&cid=38635706 [slashdot.org].
Now I recall it was from the Congo - http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=591_1249254184 [liveleak.com]. Strangely, this has not been reported by Slashdot.
At least one rodent still is missing in action.
Someone is going to do it (Score:3)
Well, the Chinese are building reactors like crazy, and working on new ones. I guess, for lack of American or European initiative, it will be the Chinese that build the first LFTR around 2020 or so; if those work as well as imagined, by 2030 everybody will be wondering why we thought of any other power source - and the Chinese will have locked up the market. And if not the LFTR, it'll be some other Generation IV design that takes off.
The technology, for all its faults, works. Ask the French. LFTRs and other GenIV ideas are evolutionary improvements, not revolutionary.
While we dither about the horrendous dangers of it, (as we die at the rate of 24,000/year from coal), others will simply move ahead without us.
Bummer to be out-tech'd by Kenya, though. (No offense, Kenya).
Let China have at it (Score:2)
Why waste our time on it when if we invent a nuclear power station that is actually desirable (which has been 5-10 years off for 40+ years) we will just give away the knowledge in the form of patents that the Chinese will unofficially ignore? Then we will out source all the relevant jobs to China and they will corner the market; why would it be any different than all the other markets? Those were back when we had the ability to say no. If we are going to do it for ourselves; we should work with the planet
How are they going to guarantee its security? (Score:2)
A nuclear plant needs to be secure constantly, it's a very bad idea to build one in an unstable country. What will happen is that the UN will have to guard it every time some fights break out.
Re:viable alternatives? (Score:5, Interesting)
First world countries have started to flog obsolete nuclear technology to third world counties. Fire sale everybody!
Re: (Score:2)
They have them in stock, please order via this shiny new web storefront [ecat.com] after purchase please leave a comment and prefably full review about how it worked/ing, please report back! The world has to learn the truth.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm already on the waiting list!
You lie! It's sad. (Score:5, Informative)
With sunshine and 30C+ temperatures throughout the year..."
This is a lie. A big one sadly. Despite being on the equator, Kenya and other countries that the equator crosses never have temperatures beyond 30 degrees Celsius for more than 3 months in a year.
In fact for Nairobi, their capital, you will freeze at night and temps never go beyond 28 degrees Celsius for most of the day. Google Nairobi weather (I just did) and you'll find temperature now (it's almost noon there) at 23 degrees Celsius.
Why is it that most people in the west (who are supposed to be the best informed), are misinformed about Africa? Why?
This BBC link [bbc.co.uk]should help educate you to an extent.
Re: (Score:2)
I've lived in Nairobi (NGO work) and I can confirm.. it gets quite cold at night relatively speaking.. some nights down to 10C... and 28C is a VERY typical daytime temperature... anything 30C and over... which does happen, is considered a heat wave.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:You lie! It's sad. (Score:4, Informative)
With sunshine and 30C+ temperatures throughout the year..."
This is a lie. A big one sadly. Despite being on the equator, Kenya and other countries that the equator crosses never have temperatures beyond 30 degrees Celsius for more than 3 months in a year.
In fact for Nairobi, their capital, you will freeze at night and temps never go beyond 28 degrees Celsius for most of the day. Google Nairobi weather (I just did) and you'll find temperature now (it's almost noon there) at 23 degrees Celsius.
Probably more to do with Nairobi's elevation. Nairobi is quite a way above sea level, the air thinner, and therefore not retaining as much heat as at sea level. But as solar cells or solar heating devices rely on solar radiation, rather than the resulting ambient heat, solar devices would be very effective nonetheless.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
So much the better: power plants based on thermal cycles (so, 90%+ of all electricity generated worldwide) require large, relatively cold heat sinks to drive the thermal gradient and dump their waste heat. Solar panels operate more efficiently when they are cold. In short, a temperate climate works in your favor, compared to a roasting hot on
Re: (Score:3)
Why is it that most people in the west (who are supposed to be the best informed), are misinformed about Africa? Why?
3 big reasons:
1. Most have never been there.
2. Thinking about the damage that Europeans and Americans have done to Africa would challenge the belief that those societies are morally good.
3. It's hardly ever taught, at least in US schools.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually this is a plus for solar. Sunny and cold is the best possible combination for photovoltaics. The efficiency goes down as they heat up.
Why not both? (Score:4, Informative)
I don't understand why this always has to be an either/or argument. Personally, I'm of the opinion that solar, wind, and nuclear all have a role to play in providing energy.
If Kenya had a small modular nuclear reactor or two, they could provide baseload power to their own country, and possibly even have enough surplus to export some electricity to neighbors (bringing net revenue to the country).
Solar and/or Wind can provide energy, but they don't really provide any kind of guarantee that you'll have electricity all the time - the Sun doesn't always shine. Yes, you can do things like molten salts to store some of the Sun's energy, but there's a limit to how much you can store. You might have enough storage to last you through the night, but will the salt still be hot enough in the morning, if it's cloudy?
Solar is a good peaking power source - the Sun's energy tends to peak around the same hours that human demand for electricity peaks (because people are doing business, and running washers, dryers, and stoves, which they don't tend to do after dark). Nuclear is a good baseload power source.
People pointing out that solar can come online faster are correct, so that's partly why I favor a combination of both nuclear and solar/wind for both developing nations, and developed nations - get the solar built quickly and start benefiting from it, while also beginning the process of building some reactors.
Re: (Score:2)
That's funny, I find I need electricity after nightfall in order to see.
Then you go to bed and turn off the lights.
You're probably right that during "prime time" (dusk till about 11pm) that there is continued power demand, I don't know for sure, but even though you are turning on your lights, you also have to remember that a lot of businesses are closing for the day, and turn out most of their lights, turn off electric-hungry equipment (computer, printing presses, manufacturing equipment, copiers, etc etc).
Light bulbs tend to be a very low-power consumption source - esp
Re: (Score:2)
Solar is still expensive. First-world countries can barely afford to heavily invest into it today, hoping to make it pay off in decades. In the meantime, they already have infrastructure to use for all their needs (which, given the quality of life, are many).
On the other hand. a country like Kenya needs some existing, proven solution that they can put in place ASAP. We should be glad they aren't just going with coal.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It's sad that Japan is ending its nuclear program. Maybe they can work out some power buyin
Re: (Score:2)
That's almost entirely backwards.
Solar will never, ever work for cars of the kind people normally drive. There's just not enough surface area on a car to collect enough power to move a modern vehicle. All solar cars are completely unusable in practice due to their complete lack of protection, accomodation or anything a normal car offers.
On the other hand, pretty much all the energy we consume (save geothermal) comes from the Sun at some point. And there's more than enough of it if it can be harvested.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I am for nuclear energy as much as you are. But I guess there is no harm trying renewable energy resources as much as humanly possible. Countries in Asia like India and countries in Africa like Kenya get huge solar energy and could start using them, with some backup nuclear plants. (I do not agree with GP that new nuclear facilities should no longer be built)
Perhaps they don't want old tech? (Score:2)
I don't really know for sure, but I suspect that Kenya and other developing nations might want newer, cheaper, safer, more efficient technologies, such as the small modular reactors which should start coming on the market in 10 or 20 years.
There's a quote from Al Gore to the effect that the problem with nuclear power is that it only comes in one size - extra large. That is how our current nuclear plants are built: $3Bn - $10Bn (the range reflects that construction costs are different in different countries
Re: (Score:2)
When a nuclear facility is decommissioned, most of the materials used to build it are either disposed of or have to sit for quite a while in a decontamination process. From the reactor vessel to the iron bars in the cement, every single item used in a nuclear facility ranges from just a little bit to incredibly hot for a long time. On top of that, construction materials get very brittle when exposed to EM flux, which is why nuclear plants require such an enormous amount of maintenance.
The chance of getting
Re: (Score:2)