Seems that the idea that a stake has been driven through the heart of the "nuclear industry", as articulated by many commentators and a few DK diarists, simply shows the American-Euro centric view of those believers.
It is this writers belief that the actual future of all forms of energy is almost as we see it now...lots more solar and wind (I don't use the fake term 'renewables' because it's unclear whether one includes or excludes hydro), coal, natural gas and nuclear. Added to the mix will be some localized, albeit sometimes significant investments in hydro (India, Venezuela and China) and geothermal.
So here is the meaty stuff:
http://af.reuters.com/...
DUBAI, June 1 (Reuters) - Saudi Arabia plans to build 16 nuclear power reactors by 2030 which could costs more than $100 billion, a Saudi-based newspaper reported on Wednesday, citing a top official.
The world's top crude exporter, Saudi is struggling to keep up with rapidly rising power demand. It has considered boosting its domestic energy capacity using nuclear reactors.
...and Lithuania...
I might add, as well, that Lithuania received two bids to build a new nuclear power from Japanese and U.S. companies, Lithuania's Energy Ministry said in a statement, Reuters reported June 1. The bids were from an alliance of Japan's Hitachi Corporation and America's General Electric Co. and from the U.S. company Westinghouse, which is majority owned by Japan's Toshiba Corp. and the Shaw Group.
As I've noted in commentary in the last week on various entries on the DK, nuclear isn't going away, despite the emotionally driven reaction to the tsunami-induced accidents in Japan.
Pro-nuclear activists reactions to German and Swiss announcements...
I am on a few professional lists of nuclear engineers and blogger-activist types. A reaction I thought interesting was expressed by many of them who are happy about Germany and Switzerland decisions to abandon carbon-free energy and support the introduction of yet more gas turbines (as "bridging technology" don't ya' see?). They argue that since Germany and certainly Switzerland cannot run their industries and commercial enterprises on renewables...already insanely expensive because of the massive feed-in tariffs, that they will be forced to rely on more fossil fuel (as Denmark and Germany are already doing) and...France's nuclear grid. This is especially true for Switzerland whose low carbon footprint is almost entirely the result of it's 40% of it's electricity production from fission. Alas...it is hard to disagree with my colleagues logic. Indeed...we will see. They want this phase out to put a bottom line as they see which technology can do what they say it can do, the massive wind and solar and nuclear lobby's notwithstanding.
Most countries...by 'count' ...don't have much in terms of energy plans. What there are exist as politically expedient "plans" to satisfy Western NGO's and UN "Commissions". Most will continue to do what they have done, which is rely on what they do have and expand fossil fuel production, most notably natural gas and coal. That is to the degree they can or want to expand electrical generation at all. Most are "wish lists".
Why we use energy
The expansion and usage of cheap, abundant and reliable energy is the basis for the expansion of the productive forces of humanity. At every level of an increase in human culture, energy was the material bedrock from which it sprang. The almost 3 billion people without reliable or any electricity are demanding to be "plugged in". As I've noted before, there is no development, no increase in standard of living, no lowering of infant mortality, no extension of longevity, not release from the drudgery of human-only powered labor without more electricity. It just doesn't happen without a light switch where power can be used when the user wants it; to supply a small refrigerator, a modest radio, television or internet access; to have light for their children to study by; for air conditioning; for decency....
So some countries, most notably in Asia, are trying to alleviate this with all forms of energy, even 'renewable' energy, but also nuclear.
Despite Fukushima....
many countries are expanding their existing nuclear plans or beginning to set up their infrastructure to do so. Let me list the countries that are still going headlong into nuclear. Here is a partial list:
China: 14 Gen III reactors, 12 Gen II reactors, 1 Gen IV reactor (27 total) under construction. 40 more (various generations) approved and sited. Another 60 or so "proposed". The "proposed" will not get approval without additional site safety plans audited in light of Fukushima. China is aiming for 1,000 GWs or 900 nuclear plants to provide half their electrical energy by the end of the century. ALSO they will be building out huge amounts of wind power (and to a lesser degree, solar energy).
Russia: 10 Reactors under construction; Another 14 approved, financed and breaking ground or to be completed by 2020 (9 years from now). This includes several fast breeder reactors that Russia is experienced in building. This is a total of 16 GWs. Be aware of the financial incentives here: they plan to burn less natural gas so they can export it to Germany. The German nuclear phase out is the main reason the Russians have upped their own reactor builds over the last 10 years. They stand to profit from increased natural gas sales to Germany, and now, Switzerland.
India: With flourishing and largely indigenous nuclear power program and expects to have 20,000 MWe nuclear capacity on line by 2020 and 63,000 MWe by 2032. It aims to supply 25% of electricity from nuclear power by 2050. They have reacted the same way China has to Fukushima: require additional safety specs for their sea-side plants and are awaiting these reports before approval of new plants can be obtained. India too is expected to meet international pressure and have dozens of GWs of wind power installed as well. From:
http://www.world-nuclear.org/...
S. Korea: Nuclear energy is a strategic priority for South Korea and capacity is planned to increase by 56% to 27.3 GWe by 2020, and then to 43 GWe by 2030. Today 21 reactors provide almost 40% of South Korea's electricity from 18.7 GWe of plant.
Korea has 5 plants under construction including 2 Gen III AP4-1400s with 6 approved and ready to break ground in the next few years. Korea obviously is concerned about Fukushima and how the Japanese have sited their plants and responded to the accident. They tend to move in an opposite direction for national pride reasons in some of their endeavors. They don't want to be like the Japanese. Like India and China, the Koreans, with their massively increasing nuclear infrastructure for domestic and export, are re-evaluating their sea-side plants for better tsunami protection.
UAE: This Arab country is planning to build 4 Korean APR-1400s and likely an additional 4 after the first 4 break ground. Their reason is interesting: after evaluating all the forms of on-demand power, including solar, they decided on reliable nuclear energy as the best fit for their desert country. For every MW of nuclear energy, they can export the same energy equivalent of natural gas instead of burning it up in their fleet of gas turbines. Does this mean they've abandoned solar energy? No, absolutely not. They are including solar in various localized projects including their first "all green city" that will have advanced architectural techniques to take advantage of solar, solar cell supplementary power during daylight hours and highly efficient AC and other desert mandated technology. The UAE sees nuclear as their future base-load with other forms of energy filling in any gaps.
So what does this all mean? Dispassionately, it means that nuclear really isn't going away, in fact it's expanding. That it expands as an overall planetary percentage of energy generated or used...? No, I think not. It will expand in absolute terms, even with the ill-timed phase outs in Switzerland and Germany and probably one or two other countries. I see wind and solar expanding some, coal slowing down but continuing to expand and...natural gas, the only energy form I see expanding exponentially (because it is now) on a planetary basis.
Joseph Kennedy, Jr, of the Kennedy clan, and big wind exponent/investor, gave a speech to the Natural Gas Industry lobby organization in February which he extolled solar and wind because they "...are tied together with gas: solar and wind means natural gas...". His words, not mine.
The future will not be based on wind and solar but on EVERY form of energy, including, unfortunately, gas and coal.