This Blog Shutdown

Ruth will not be continuing this blog under the name "We Support Lee" because the plans for the William States Lee III Nuclear Generating Station are moribund, or abandoned. Unfortunately. Sadly. Shamefully.  

Any other meanings of the phrase "We Support Lee" are irrelevant to the topic of this blog and relate to high schools that have now changed their name, or to the Lee Generals in Montgomery, Alabama. I want nothing to do with Robert E. Lee or anything named after him. 

(Trivia about the town that would have hosted the nuclear plant: Gaffney High School is ranked No. 48 in the High School Football America 100). 

We Told You So....

One of Germany's pro-coal protests 

 The Nuclear Renaissance didn't happen. And, that has consequences. Gas prices are soaring owing to heavy demand from China and other countries of East Asia. This has increased the usage of coal. The CEO of Total said, "Because coal today is a king, because coal is cheaper than all the other sources of energy." 

 This could have been avoided. Germany could have stopped the Energiewende, which led to the closures of ten nuclear energy facilities, with six more on the chopping block. 

In Germany, the high gas prices cause an incentive to use lignite, which is the dirtiest form of coal. Coal is now the leading source of energy in Germany, after calm winds decreased the contribution of wind. 
Coal consumption has also increased in the United States. (apologies that Bloomberg does not believe this info should be available to average citizens like you and me). 

 The impacts of climate change have become more obvious. Yet, the planning and investment in large-scale carbon-free energy has barely happened in the advanced democracies of Europe. It's faltering in the United States. 

Fatih Birol, executive director of the International Energy Organization and David Malpass, president of of the World Bank group, recently said, 

"Transparent and competitive markets for electricity production, especially when combined with some form of carbon price or tax, would accelerate the transition away from coal. You can’t phase out polluting coal plants if you don’t have low-carbon power sources – such as solar, wind, hydropower and nuclear – ready to pick up the slack." 

Then, further down the page, they said "Private sector investments will be vital in financing the cleaner energy sources that replace coal, but policy makers need to take the lead in mobilizing and incentivizing this massive ramping up of investment. Tackling coal is not something that markets will do if left to their own devices. It requires large-scale loans with substantial concessions." Hey, but I thought it was cheap to build solar, wind, and natural gas turbines! Didn't think that any "loan concessions" were needed! 

I know that a lot of you all won't like me quoting this guy associated with the World Bank. Many of you believe that the private sector is the only sector that should make choices regarding energy and other matters in society. You detest the government, and you detest the international organizations even more! Current Republicans are the most sensitive bunch of whiners I have ever met!

Coal miners and coal plant workers are a lot more vocal than most of those who work in nuclear energy. 

The consequences of the failure to phase out coal on a more rapid scale are dire.

Back To Energy Topics at The Atlantic

 

Today, The Atlantic has a discussion of the Democrats' effort regarding a climate bill. 

First things first. I voted a straight Democratic ticket this past election. I don't normally vote straight tickets, but in 2020, that was necessary. The Trump position on the pandemic was intolerable because it was everything NOT to do to respond to a pandemic. Republican positions ranged from actual denial of the existence of the coronavirus to an embrace of the anti-vaxxer movement. The current consequence of these positions is grave - full hospitals that occasionally have to turn away the victims of car crashes. A friend told me about a situation in Texas where a car crash happened and the victims had to be airlifted across the state rather than be brought to a nearby hospital. 

I'm no physicist, chemist or engineer. I'm just a lowly person with a biological science background. Yet, for me, it was necessary to take a strong, forward stance against anti-science positions that are so prominent in politics today, especially on the Republican side with regard to the pandemic, vaccines, etc. 

Although the Democrats have been doing great regarding efforts to get people vaccinated, they are not immune to anti-science positions in other fields, such as energy. These positions create stumbling blocks to effective action on climate.  

Michael Grunwald of Politico notes that "There’s also broad political support for nuclear power and carbon capture, which are both consistent with a zero-emissions grid ..."  

However, Robinson Meyer at The Atlantic notes that there is opposition to a climate deal from the Right of the Democratic Party, especially coal supporter Joe Manchin and fossil fuel supporter Kyrsten Sinema. And, there is opposition to effective action on climate change from a Left fringe that will only accept solar, wind, and geothermal. Those extremes are anti-science because, on the Right, they deny the need to remove coal as a source of energy to protect the climate, and, on the Left, they deny the need for energy sources like nuclear to produce enough electricity for humanity to survive.  

The Right and Left extremes among the Democrats are putting a boulder in the road toward effective action toward climate action. 

A Bad Omen for Free and Fair Elections

The Iowa caucuses are the beginning to the Presidential Primary season. They, and the New Hampshire primary, set the tone for the Democratic campaign.

After the Florida recount debacle in November 2000 which handed the election to the disastrous warmonger George H.W. Bush, who was a proximate cause of the Great Recession, you woulda thunk that Democrats would be highly conscientious of avoiding even the slightest appearance of electoral misdoings.

Not so. I realize that a Caucus involves three tabulations and is a bit harder to count than a ballot. However, a caucus also has superb photographic evidence as the caucus-goers go to the groups that support their candidate, and if a candidate is under 15% support, walk across the room to another candidate's group in the second round of the caucus. An election, especially, if paper ballots are not used, has no such evidence beyond the bits and bytes in the voting machine tally.

I happened to be in Las Vegas on the night of the 2000 election (Bush v. Gore). I was astonished as results came in and a winner could not be determined.

That was also the night that I started to lose my faith in the whole (fake) concept of an "exceptional American democracy."

The following weeks contained much discussion of hanging chads and butterfly ballots, as well as possible intimidation of Florida election officials, especially by Bush supporters.

The reality is: There are countries in South America that report election results in a transparent manner within a couple hours of the polls having been closed. This includes nationwide elections. Because these countries have some remote areas, results are usually reported after 85-95% of the votes have come in. Some of these countries have international observers present, partly because of past or ongoing low-grade conflicts. Importantly, these countries use paper ballots. Paper ballots are recommended by computer scientists who are well-aware of the possible ways to commit electoral fraud using electronic voting machines. Verified Voting recommends paper ballots.

The null results, after eighteen hours, of the Iowa Democratic caucuses serve to increase my skepticism and disdain of the idiotic concept of "US American exceptionalism." The rarely-admitted fact is that the countries founded by Simón Bolívar in South America have a governmental structure very similar to that of the United States. Although Venezuela and Bolivia are certainly not known for free or fair elections, Colombian and Peruvian elections are highly transparent compared to those in the United States.

Eighteen hours is a lot of time in which malfeasant actors can rig an election!

In this case, I suspect rigging by the Democratic National Committee in an effort to prevent Bernie Sanders and possibly also Elizabeth Warren from taking leading positions in the caucus. Joe Biden attempted to file an injunction against release of partial results, but a 62% result was released anyway on Tuesday night around 20 hours after the caucus. It's known that neither Joe Biden nor Amy Klobuchar got much support in the caucus. They wouldn't try to rig in favor of them, because of their thin support.  The possibility of electoral rigging would be in favor of a "centrist" with strong support in Iowa, such as Pete Buttigeig. There were many pictures circulating on Twitter showing large crowds in favor of Bernie Sanders and in some cases, in favor of Pete Buttigeig. Several pictures showed tiny groups of two or three people for Biden or Andrew Yang.

Reality Check:  While up until now, Republicans have been at the heart of most electoral dirty deeds in the US, this year the Democrats have created a terrible start to their primary season, all because of some "shiny new software."  The utter opaqueness of the Iowa caucus results tabulation causes further distrust in the US electoral process.

It is time for a large contingent of international observers to come to the United States to observe at least the November General Election in all fifty states plus Puerto Rico.

California Fires and the Utilities

Fires have always happened in California around October and November when the Santa Ana winds happen. It's very dry in California at that time. As a little kid in California, my sinuses and nasal passages were so dry during October and November that that's the time I would catch cold.

Back when I was small, fires in California were typically set by teenage arsonists. Deliberate arson seems rare today in California although other human-related causes are very frequent. I guess Gen Z and the Millennials have fewer firebugs than the Baby Boomers did when they were young.

Today's fires are often larger and faster-moving than the fires when I was young. In addition, there are more fires than there were than in the 1940s and 50s.  The California Chaparral Institute notes that excessive fires destroy chaparral and convert it into weedy, non-native grassland that burns more easily than chaparral does. You can see photos of bare, grassy hills where the chaparral scrubland has been destroyed by too-frequent fires.

Let's talk about electric utilities and fires, because they have been linked. That association was rarely made when I was young in California and teenagers were starting fires for thrills.

Note that an electric utility usually has two sides: generating and distribution. Generating can be done using hydroelectric, nuclear, solar, or the fossil fuels coal, oil, or gas. California currently relies on a combination of renewable sources and natural gas.  California never had easy access to coal, and thus coal has never been a major energy source, although a few small coal plants formerly operated in California. All are closed now.

Electric distribution is the way to get the electricity from the point of generation to the customer. It usually involves high-voltage trunk lines, step-down transformers, and circuits to homes and businesses.

Recently, California utilities have shut off electricity during high-risk fire conditions. This is known as a Public Safety Power Shutoff (PSPS).  Californians have complained about the power outages, particularly their impact on people with medical needs.

Several of the fires that have broken out recently under Santa Ana wind conditions are linked to power lines owned by major investor-owned utilities. The California Public Utilities Commission has determined that over 2,000 fires between 2017 and 2017 were linked to power lines.

The 77,758-acre Kincade Fire has been linked to a Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) transmission tower.   More recently, the 9400-acre Maria Fire has been linked to a Southern California Edison power line that had been re-energized after a Public Safety Power Shutoff. The 2017 Thomas Fire was linked to a line owned by SCE and the 2018 Camp Fire that killed 85 people in the town of Paradise has been linked to PG&E equipment.  Liability from the Camp Fire and fires in 2017 has caused PG&E to go bankrupt.

San Diego Gas and Electric has a smaller service area than PG&E or SCE. However, they have buried 60% of their power lines and taken other major fire prevention steps.

Back when I was young, power lines rarely started fires. Most of the lines were newer then. The power companies cleared vegetation around the lines. Reddy Kilowatt was still a mascot at Southern California Edison.

More importantly, when I was young, the population of California was only 11 million people. It is now nearly 40 million people.  More than 90% of California's wildfires have human-related causes.

The natural condition of chaparral, the dominant ecosystem in California, is to have infrequent fires once every 30 to 150 years. Recently, there have been fires more frequently in California than the chaparral ecosystem can tolerate. The reason for the frequency of fires is because humans start them in one way or the other. Lately, that has been because of faults in electrical infrastructure.

During recent years, hundreds of thousands of houses have been built in the hills in high-risk fire areas. The wildland-urban interface has grown rapidly putting large numbers of people at fire risk.

More people and more houses being built in hillside areas means more power distribution lines and consequently greater vulnerability to wildfires. Almost all of these houses are made of wood.

Dr. Stephen M. Strader found that the increase in building in fire hazard zones from 1940 onward has placed millions of people in harm's way. Strader concludes that

 "The continued development and implementation of building codes, standards, and practices that reduce the likelihood of homes, businesses, etc., being destroyed by wildfires is vital in creating a more wildfire resistant society."

Californians love their overvalued wooden houses. They love to build them in the hills. Real estate in many cities and suburbs in California is extremely expensive.  There is a huge disjuncture between the fire risk, the wooden construction of the houses, and the high prices.

This disjuncture must be addressed by insurance companies. Some have stopped renewing policies in high fire risk areas.  If you can't insure a house, lenders won't write a mortgage for it.

There is now an insurer of last resort known as the California FAIR Plan. The FAIR Plan is a private association of insurers that offers less comprehensive insurance for homes where traditional insurers have refused to write policies. Pretty soon, they might start writing homeowner's insurance that only protects against burglary and flood but not fire.

Whereas homes in Europe and Latin America, including zones of high seismic risk such as Chile, are usually built of reinforced brick-and-concrete, or sometimes adobe, California's builders and consumers insist on wooden houses because they are cheaper to build initially. Frank Lloyd Wright knew better.

By the way, "reinforced" means that metal rebar is placed and tied together as a major structural element in the masonry. This is usually done in the concrete support columns of a building, but sometimes rebar is strung through the holes in concrete masonry units. The rebar has a "bend" and "give" that provides earthquake resistance.

Perhaps insurers will start refusing to write policies for wooden homes in fire areas, but allow homes with adobe, concrete, steel, or brick elements to be underwritten.

Other than the increase in population placing themselves at risk by moving into fire areas, there may be utility and regulatory problems with the power distribution system in California. Why the lack of maintenance of power lines?

There have been lawsuits against the nuclear generating stations in California since around 1970 when Atlantic Richfield oil executive Robert O. Anderson funded Friends of the Earth. There have been numerous expensive lawsuits against both Diablo Canyon and San Onofre during the past forty years.

It is my suspicion that lawsuits against nuclear generating plants in California have diverted resources away from the utilities' maintenance funds for the distribution end. Pressure groups have focused overwhelmingly on the nuclear generating stations and have demanded that the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) focus its attention on them while ignoring deterioration in distribution systems, all the while more and more people move into fire zones. This diverted the CPUC from paying attention to fire risk until around 2008. Thus, the CPUC never told the utilities that they need to bury power lines.

Some people including governor Gavin Newsom have suggested that the State of California take over PG&E. Although the company is bankrupt, there is no other reason for state takeover of the company. A state takeover doesn't necessarily mean that power lines will be buried or infrastructure improved.  And, it won't address the fundamental problem, which is too many people moving into fire areas and building wooden houses that are likely to catch fire.

 

Amazon Fires - A Weapon of Mass Climate Destruction

There is currently a tragedy of immense proportions occurring in the world's most bio diverse area, Amazonia.

Aaron Mak writes that most of the fires have been deliberately (or occasionally, inadvertently) set by people clearing land, as encouraged by Brazil's tyrant Jairo Bolsonaro.

Up until now, this blog has largely been written in support of carbon-free nuclear energy as a way to stave off climate change.

That support still exists, but these events in Brazil show that the world's environmental situation is dire and drastic.

The fires in Amazonia are a double blow to Earth's ecosystem. As the trees burn, enormous amounts of carbon are released into the atmosphere. Once the trees have burned, the destroyed trees can no longer act as a carbon sink and source of the oxygen that all animals including you and me need to survive.

Robinson Meyer notes that even if people were to attempt to replant the burned areas of the Amazon, millions of species of plants and animals would be lost and biodiversity would not be regenerated for 10 million years, multiple times longer than Homo sapiens has existed.

I have personally seen "replanting" in areas of the Andes. The trees that were planted were mostly a monoculture non-native Eucalyptus.  These Australian introductions consume more water than the native vegetation once consumed. The current government is now encouraging people to cut the eucalyptus down for lumber or firewood. and is trying to get people to plant native trees.

France has canceled a trade deal with Brazil because of Brazil's destruction of the most bio diverse region of Earth. In return, tyrant Bolsonaro raised a furor when he claimed that France was applying a colonialist mindset.

Bolsonaro is a tyrant because his actions threaten the survival of millions of people and the natural world itself.

Bolsonaro must be brought before the International Court of Justice in the Hague.

There must be an international commitment to protect Amazonia (what's left of it) with an international peacekeeping force that would block unauthorized entry by outsiders attempting to clear land but would strictly protect the rights of indigenous people who live in Amazonia. This concept is mentioned in part in an article by Franklin Foer in the The Atlantic. Foer notes that the existential threat to humanity posed by the burning of the Amazon is greater than the threat from weapons of mass destruction. He argues that the response to Brazil's governmental abuse of the Amazon must be as robust as the world's response to countries that produce WMD's.

Goodbye VC Summer Construction

What is there to say?

Time to listen to some Johnny Cash and do some thinkin.'

Five thousand highly skilled, strictly screened, hardworking Americans just lost their jobs.

• It Ain't Me, Babe
  
• The Man In Black
  
• Ghost Riders in the Sky
  

This blog has said very little since mid or late 2008. That was the year when the Great Recession started.

I quit blogging because of what I saw. The banks and cheating mortgage houses were bailed out. The common man and woman were not bailed out.

I made a prediction back then. I predicted that the vaunted nuclear renaissance (which I supported) would not come to be, largely for economic and political reasons.

I really didn't want to brag or share a negative prediction like that about a technology that I support, so I turned to other things, although I still followed nuclear energy supporters on Facebook.

In the nine years since late 2008, I have, among other things:

• Lived in North Carolina for a while
  
• Seen Recession-torn men begging on American streetcorners with cardboard signs, their beloved and loyal guardian dogs always at their side wearing battered but strong collars and leads
  
• Traveled internationally and crossed more borders than the Taco Bell chihuahua
  
• Entered my 50s
  
• Led a major home renovation project - a second storey. We used seismic-resistent concrete-and-rebar construction rather than wooden framing.
  
• Experienced several years of life outside the United States
  

Enough about me. Let's talk about my prediction and why I made it.

By the way, I am NOT an engineer or expert in the field, but my perspective may be a little broader than that of a specialist.

======================================================

Here are the reasons the nuclear renaissance failed in the United States. Some of these reasons, like the huge expenses of large nuclear projects, are universally applicable. Other reasons are specific to the United States or maybe to western countries. I'll try to note where applicable. Reasons for Failure of Nuclear Renaissance:

• A. Economic and political dominance of fossil fuel industry - worldwide. I strongly agree with Rod Adams on this issue. The economic and political dominance of fossil fuels is a meta-factor that affects almost all the other reasons below.
  
• B. Enormous costs associated with Gigawatt size of additions to VC Summer plant - specific to this project but applicable to others
  
• C. Regulatory burdens. Intimately linked to fossil fuel dominance of political system.
  
  • i. LNT hypothesis in regulations, although it is highly unlikely to be biologically realistic
    
  • ii. Reworking of major aspects of construction to comply with regulations that regulator admits are not urgent.
    
• D. Failure to attach adequate costs to carbon emissions. Bias in favor of wind & solar and against nuclear in climate-change proposals and legislation. This bias reaches to the highest international level - the IPCC. These issues are intimately related to A - fossil fuel dominance of economy and political system.
  
• E. Short-term (quarterly) mindset of investment and banking community. Largely specific to US and parts of Europe. Aggravated by 2008 Recession. This is a big part of the reason why a nuclear projects in the UAE can succeed, but they can't in the US. I didn't compare with China or India because they have much lower labor costs than the US or the UAE
  
• F. Entrenched anti-nuclear activism. I cannot consider this to be nearly as large a factor in this project failure as it was in projects like Shoreham in New York State. The reason is political. The average South Carolinian loves the outdoors but expresses that in ways consistent with conservative beliefs. Ducks Unlimited, local parks, deer clubs, and college football are much more supported by South Carolinians than are political/anti-nuclear groups like the Sierra Club, NRDC, and FOE. Sure, a few university people join these groups, but the average South Carolinian would rather be in the NRA (hunting) than in the Sierra Club, even a chapter that actually offers hikes.
  
• G. Lack of leadership by both Democrats and Republicans in government. President Trump and Energy Secretary Perry have really disappointed here. While Democrats like Obama appoint outright anti-nuclear activists (Jaczko) to the NRC, Republicans like to say platitudes but do nothing in favor of nuclear energy, the strongest alternative to fossil fuels.
  
• H. In America, bankers and lawyers run things. In China, the engineers run things.
  
• I. Inertia by society in general. While scientists like Dr. James Hansen are highly motivated to support nuclear energy, the millions in the general public rarely have the mathematical aptitude to understand that wind and solar are not enough to replace fossil fuels in the context of a still-growing global population of 7.4 Billion.
  

Watch For Fossil Fuel Deregulation Proposals

Keep your eyes out for fossil fuel-related deregulation legislation in Congress. Lobby for equivalent bills regarding nuclear energy.

Occasional Blog Posts Coming Up.

I have not blogged for several years.

During those years, a great deal has changed within the United States and the world, and also in my personal life.

I am considering discussing these changes in some occasional future posts.

I will go ahead and make this first post an explanation of the name of this blog.

Firstly, this blog is named after the proposed William States Lee Nuclear Generating Station, near Gaffney, South Carolina. The station was named after William States Lee III, former chairman of Duke Power.

The plant's Construction and Operating License (COL) has been substantially delayed.

This blog cannot cover only this subject. For one thing, I no longer live in the general area of the Carolinas.

One subject I hope to discuss is infrastructure in the US. A robust infrastructure committment is my most earnest hope for the new Trump Administration. More about that later.

One little thing I'd like to do right now is to make it very clear that this blog is not related to Robert E. Lee, or to any other Lees other than William States Lee.

A note about comments: I am disabling them for most posts because I do not have the time to curate them.