And the hundreds of farmers in that region of Japan.... now realizing nothing grown on their properties will have value for perhaps dozens of years. What a pity. Let’s hope the Japanese government and/or insurers compensate them for their properties, and pay for relocation to greener pastures.
* * * * * * *
11. Disposing of Nuclear Waste
Thailand does not have a stellar reputation for dealing with waste. Perhaps it’s not fair to compare waste disposal habits of the general populace with projected policies for dealing with nuclear waste. However, analogies can be made between the habits of a certain culture and projections of how such people might deal with larger issues. For example: if a dog dies in Monaco and a dog dies in a village in North Korea – one can be expected to assume the locals in each locale would deal with disposing of the dead dogs differently.
In Thailand, you can go to a field the day after an outdoor festival – and the grounds will be strewn with trash. Plastic and paper trash will be everywhere, and if there’s been any wind – the trash could settle hundreds of meters away. Similarly, Thai parks suffer a similar, albeit less dramatic fate. The closer the park is to a populated area, the more trash will be blowing around. Glass trash is rare, though not exempt, sometimes smashed for added effect.
If you’ve ever done physical work with Thais, such as construction or landscaping, you’ll know that they’re not inclined to take precautions. In other words, things like gloves, earplugs, dust masks, or safety glasses are rarely seen in situations where they’re needed. As often as not, an offer to wear earplugs or gloves or a dust-mask, is met with a cheery, ‘mai pen rai.’ …same sort of response that 90% of Thai drivers will give, if you suggest they wear a seat-belt. Indeed, many a time, when I’ve been a passenger in a car, and I reach to fasten the seatbelt, the driver will good naturedly wave my efforts away, as if to say, ‘Are you insinuating I’m an unsafe driver? Don’t worry, we won’t crash.’ A caustic material such as PVC cement (a toxic glue) will be cavalierly applied with a naked finger. Perhaps it’s just considered wimpy to use safety precautions.
Authorities, who should pose a good example, often don’t. Every so often, newspaper readers will see a photo of a top politician riding without a seatbelt (in a car) or without a helmet while riding a motorcycle – or the helmet is on, but it’s unfastened, which renders it useless. These things are mentioned - not as put downs, but to give a sense of the ‘devil-may-care’ attitude that prevails in Thailand – as regards personal safety precautions, and responsibly dealing with garbage.
Employees working with nuclear power plants will likely comply with safety precautions most of the time – especially when inspectors are on the scene or it’s a photo-op. However, knowing Thai habits, is to know how quickly things can get lax in that regard.
For example: In a Thai town, every motorbike rider knows that between 9 am and 5 pm on weekdays, within certain parts of town, there’s a chance of getting pulled over and ticketed by a cop for not wearing a helmet. So naturally (for them) all other times, and at all other locales, few helmets are worn.
It’s a simple drill: Wear a helmet when and where you might get pulled over, don’t wear a helmet all other places and times.
Same can be said for putting helmets on children passengers on motorbikes (never happens), on pillion riders (rarely happens), slowing down for yellow lights (never happens), running red lights within the first two seconds (happens often), driving on the wrong side of the road (common), cutting blind corners too tightly (very often), ….the list goes on.
Nuclear waste falls in to two basic categories: Low-level and high-level. Low level is everything (uniforms, gloves, tools, etc) that has come in to contact with radioactive material. High level waste is the spent radioactive material itself – whether it be spent fuel rods, or any other items or construction materials which have high residual radiation.
Throughout the sixty odd years that high level nuclear waste has been generated, there’s never been a satisfactory way to deal with it. Even today’s best scientists and engineers haven’t found a sure-fire way to put it safely away for the tens of thousands of years it will be significantly radioactive. It can’t be shot to the sun - too expensive.
Currently, most highly radioactive waste is placed in containment packages (cement with copper and/or glass coating) with dubious effectiveness. No such containment is very reliable, and already there are reports of such packages leaking. In doing so, nearby flora and fauna is adversely affected. The extent of damage cannot be known, because such things are happening in all sorts of sea trenches worldwide. Anyone who is familiar with trash dumping at sea knows there are myriad ways to skirt the rules (if there are any rules to begin with):
>>>> Containment packages can easily be made skimpier than required
>>>> Radioactive trash can be over-packed within
>>>> Waste packages can be clandestinely dumped.
Who’s going to know if the waste handling process is proceeding as regulated? Are Thai people going to be content to leave such procedures to officials who come from a culture where trash is routinely and consistently dealt with irresponsively?
Perhaps it’s not fair to make the following comparison, but a person can stroll along any stretch of the hundreds of Km of Thai coastline – and every linear meter will contain trash. The exception might be rare small stretches where hotel staff clean the beach. That’s offset by other places where thick trash covers wide areas. Most of those hundreds of tons of trash is plastic, but there are a variety of other items, such as large burned-out light bulbs (tossed by squid farmers), wire cables, discarded nets. Granted, nuclear waste will (hopefully) get dealt with more responsively than every-day garbage, but the point here is there’s a deeply ingrained attitude that people have, that goes something like this; ‘once something is dumped out of sight or in the sea, it magically becomes a non-issue’ - a variation of the English saying; ‘out of sight, out of mind.’
There have been plans in the US to bury it deep in supposedly ‘stable’ salt mountains somewhere near the California / Arizona border. Although that idea has some merit, it also has potential drawbacks – not least is what people will think about such waste – tens of thousands of years in the future – if there are people around then.
American Indians in that region are particularly offended. Their outlook goes something like this; “We revere the land of our ancestors and the spirits of all things that make up the world. We take personal offense that radioactive poison will get entombed deep in the land - a poison that will continue to emit lethal radiation non-stop for many lifetimes.”
U.S. authorities say the mountain they’ve picked is safe and has little water seepage. However, these are the same types of authorities who convinced many intelligent people that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The best US military intelligence and CIA experts working together - were dead wrong about WMD in Iraq, and that was a contemporary scenario. As for plugging radioactivity in to a mountain; Americans are being asked to believe people who are talking authoritatively about projections for tens of thousands of years in the future.
What will the warning signs look like – will intelligent beings be expected to read the signs correctly in the far future? If the signs are carved in a rock (it’s doubtful they’ll use a sheet metal nailed to a wood pole), future beings might misinterpret it as an indicator of buried treasure – who knows?
Most contemporary people can not be expected to be as sensitive to the land as Native Americans or aboriginal people. Yet there can is still some resonant connection with the land with everyone - even people who worship Wall Street or sequined celebrities.
Thailand doesn’t have any mountains for storing such things. They have some nice looking hills which they call ‘mountains’ but they’re just bamboo covered bumps on the horizon. So how does EGAT plan to store the steady supply of radioactive waste? Will it seal the stuff in car-sized pellets of cement covered in glazing – and then dump it somewhere in the Andaman Sea ….or the Gulf of Thailand? What about sending the stuff back to Australia, where Thailand’s yellowcake will likely come from. Aussies have vast tracts of sparsely inhabited land, but it’s doubtful they’ll want to store radioactive waste from Thailand - or any other country.
These are the types of things we can expect EGAT to gloss over on their 138 billion baht ‘feasibility study.’ If there are any public meetings, and some brave person has the audacity to ask the question, “How do you plan to dispose of the high level nuclear waste?” we can expect EGAT to say something similar to what their spokesmen said in a direct quote (below) a Bangkok Post interview from March 3rd, 2008; URL: http://bangkokpost.com/Business/03Mar2008_biz22.php
Note: the debate questions were written and the answers were submitted, so it was not a ‘live’ debate where speakers are required to ‘think on their feet.’
|
Mr. Kopr Kritayakirana is described as “an expert adviser with the Nuclear Power Programme Development Office (NPPDO).” His prepared answer to the question of what is to be done with radioactive waste disposal is verbatim as follows;
“The easiest and most popular way is to use first "wet storage" and then "dry storage" at the reactor site itself. Of the 440 reactors running, more than half use this approach. Spent fuel rods are first kept in a water tank right next to the reactor core (wet storage) to cool down for three to five years. They are then taken out of water and put in steel caskets and stored in a simple concrete shack (dry storage) near the reactor building. They can stay there for 40 to 50 years.”
“Long-term technological solutions to deal with spent fuel, such as "breeder reactor" or "transmutation burner" systems, have nearly been commercialised. A global nuclear fuel "leasing" scheme is being set up: the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP). There is, therefore, no pressing concern to deal with spent nuclear fuel.”
|
Comments from the peanut gallery: Highly radioactive material stored in a pool of water, and later in steel caskets in a concrete shed might be a moderately tenable short term solution – if all goes hummingly well as planned. However, even the best laid plans can go awry.
Radioactive material is a big lure for terrorist groups - it can be used to make weapons (dirty bombs) and is a lure for extortion. More than a few times, insurgents in Thailand have broken in to armories and stolen weapons. Other none-too-rare occurrences are armory explosions – which happen about once per year in Thailand.
Nuclear waste is not explosive, yet things can go wrong – even with plans to store the stuff in ‘concrete sheds.’ A gasoline tanker could be parked nearby, somebody flicks a cigarette butt – boom! Authorities will tell you that such a freak occurrence could never happen - but that’s standard jargon – and it’s always heard before a major calamity hits their post. Immediately afterwards, the blame machine gets cranked up, and it’s always the guys at the bottom of the totem pole (if anyone) who get reprimanded.
Mr. Kritayakirana mentions possible ways to mitigate the issue of radioactive garbage, such as: “Long-term technological solutions to deal with spent fuel, such as "breeder reactor" or "transmutation burner" systems….” But that sounds a bit like tech-talk gobbly gook – intended to impress the eagerly impressionable among us. Indeed, ‘breeder reactor’ is where the waste came from, so how is the waste going to get rendered inert by going back through the radioactive furnace? He goes on to mention, “A global nuclear fuel ‘leasing’ scheme is being set up: the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP).”
Really? Will other entities want to lease spent fuel rods – for what? It sounds like either a plan for possibly reprocessing the rods (for weapons?). Reprocessing is a dubious-sounding and probably unworkable endeavor. Or perhaps GNEP is an incentive by rich countries to spread the use of nuclear for power generation. Maybe a ploy similarly to what the US did when it went to war #2 in Iraq – and it found few friends standing by its side. In order to recruit allies, Uncle Sam wound up paying all expenses for military contingents from smaller countries such as Thailand and Mongolia.
Since the US is home to at least two of the largest nuclear power plant contractors (General Electric and Westinghouse), then it might come as no surprise that the US government (or the corporations themselves) are subsidizing their commercial interests by setting up something with a nice sounding name like; ‘Global Nuclear Energy Partnership’ in order to try to defray a small customer country’s prickly issue of ‘what to do with radioactive garbage.’
Mr. Kritayakirana ends his comments by writing, “There is, therefore, no pressing concern to deal with spent nuclear fuel.” Those are comforting words, and as such may play well with some all-too-impressionable Thai people. However, those who care about environmental issues for future generations, won’t agree with Mr. Kritahakirana when he says, “there’s no pressing concerns.” The concerns are very pressing and will need to be addressed responsibly. Indeed, the serious issue of ‘what to do with radioactive waste’ is, on its own, a ‘make or break issue’ – regarding whether Thailand should go nuclear or not.
Just for fun, let’s compare the previous paragraphs, (where we’ve been grappling with how to deal responsibly with nuclear waste) – with how to deal with the waste from another fuel, namely; solar. “But wait,” you might say, “solar generates no waste!” Precisely the point. No mining and processing the fuel, virtually no safety issues, and no waste after using it – and those aren’t the only reasons why solar is a much better choice for Thailand’s future electricity generation needs.
* * * * * * *
12. Alternatives
When solar is mentioned in regards to generating electricity, there’s often the response; “Yes, solar panels are good, but they’re expensive and inappropriate for large scale power generation.” In other words, for well-off individuals, having a few solar panels on the roof - are cool way to power some of their lights and appliances.
Although that picture has some validity, it’s by no means the big picture of what’s currently happening with solar. It would be like, in 1903, if someone saw a few carriage-looking cars putt-putting along at 5 miles per hour, and said, “Yes, the internal combustion engine is a fun little machine, but it could never really apply to future mass transportation needs. For that we’ll need to stay with the steam engine.”
Thai authorities have been shown to be ‘behind the curve’ at times. Less than ten years ago, top ministers in the Chuan government decided to opt out of joining up with other Southeast Asian countries on a plan to increase internet speed for Thailand. The proposal was to share payment for a series of conduits which would increase internet speeds significantly. Top Thai officials declined the offer, as they could not, at that time, see the significance of their citizens having fast internet service. More recently, the head of Communications in former PM Thaksin’s government claimed he didn’t know or care much about the world wide web. These are the types of leaders who get put in top leadership positions in 21st century Thailand.
To a great extent, such leaders are products of a Thai school system which rarely if ever fails a student, and is lax about cheating on exams. They’re products of a school system which allows every student to pass on to the next grade, with little regard for test scores or attendance records. That same sort of lackadaisical attitude carries on to government - which will not allow a manager to get fired, regardless of the seriousness of an offense. The worst punishment for a government authority is; assignment, with full salary and benefits, to what they call ‘an inactive post.’ Also, entrance to prestigious universities, and promotions within government/military are often based on ‘who you know’ and ‘who you’re related to’ rather than how bright or qualified a candidate is.
There are about a dozen recently formulated committees that have been charged with dealing with various facets of getting nuclear power plants built in Thailand. Each committee has a serious-sounding name, such as ‘Office for the Peaceful Application of Atoms’, and each is headed and staffed by people who have gone through the ‘always-pass’ school system. Their jobs have nothing to do with investigating alternatives to nuclear. Instead, all the committees and personal are assigned with establishing nuclear plants in Thailand. The game plan is simple: Don’t question whether nuclear plants are a good idea for Thailand - that’s already been established by your bosses. If you rock the boat, you could get posted to an inactive post at a moment’s notice. Any questions?
Before giving details about the latest developments in solar, let’s take a moment to mention some other interesting options.
Of the other top ‘runner ups,’ wind power shows some great potential. It is already proving to be a viable electricity producer off the coasts of Denmark, and in the pacific hills of California, among other places. Saudi Arabia, despite having large oil deposits, is paying the Germans and Danes to install wind generators in their deserts. For its part, Thailand doesn’t appear to have consistently strong wind patterns to support wind power generation on a large scale.
Tidal power and wave power are other ‘honorable mentions’ with potential, and are worth serious study. Currently there are several interesting designs available. Tide and wave generators are worth considering for Thailand – and may inspire some Thai inventors to come up with new designs.
|
The following article is excerpted from a May 2008
syndicated newsletter written
|
|
D. Tapping Tidal Currents for Electric Power:
Solar power works best when the sun is shining, but with the current breaksthroughs in effectiveness and efficiency, solar can also generate power during hazy or partially overcast skies. When combined with storage technology, solar can deliver power 24 hours a day, and can prove functional even during several-day stretches of no sun.
Even so, ocean waves keep breaking on beaches and tides and currents keep ebbing and flowing 24/7 - providing promise of being a steady energy provider.
The following is a quote from Brian Wagner for the Voice of America published on the RenewableEnergyWorld.com Online website:
“The same energy that drives ocean waves and currents may be a rich source of electrical power. Researchers in Florida say even gentle flows of two or three knots are enough to drive a propeller attached to an underwater turbine. Advocates say ocean power could be cheap and help and replace oil or coal-based systems.”
Douglas Bedgood, president of Keys Hydro Power is planning to build a turbine farm in the Florida Keys, ‘We could upscale this to 10 feet across and it would be perfect [for 24 hour power generation].’ Units could be added as needed.
The goal is to harness the energy produced by the rise and fall of waters during the tidal cycle. His group is working on a test turbine that it plans to submerge in a site about [thirty feet] under water between two islands. By the end of 2008 or early 2009, Doug and his team plan to have several turbines functioning. The following year, the plan is to have several hundred in series.” Bedgood said.
The first step, however, is to show authorities that the groundbreaking project will not damage wildlife or coastal resources in the popular tourist area. Bedgood says marine life should be unharmed. “For manatees and turtles, our turbines will be mounted up off the [ocean] floor, so they can maneuver through them. And the leading edges of any moving part will have foam rubber cushions on them,” he explains.
Similar projects are planned in Europe and in other U.S. cities. Just 300 kilometers from Key West, researchers at Florida Atlantic University want to tap the powerful Gulf Stream current that brings warm water north into the Atlantic Ocean.
‘Just a portion of the Gulf Stream contains a significant velocity with the equivalent energy of some of the world’s richest energy sites,’ says Rick Driscoll, head of the University’s Science Center
He goes on to say; “It is a lot more challenging to put something in the ocean than in a tidal pool or along a sea shore. There is a lot of significant potential, and perfecting such new and existing technologies could bring real benefits to other countries around the world.”
|
What sorts of alternative energy research are Thai scientists involved with? With hundreds of Km of coast, Thailand is in a prime position for tapping in to the vast potential of tidal energy. Even if Thai-based research doesn’t come up with any practical new technology, at least the effort’s been made. Some would say spending a portion of EGAT’s 1.38 billion baht on research toward renewable energy technology - would be lot smarter than spending that gargantuan sum of money on a report with a foregone conclusion.
If Thai researchers are not inspired or
innovative enough to do their own experimentation – then there are existing
blueprints for functional power generators which harness the unceasing power of
coastal waves and tides. As far back as
the mid-1960’s there was a front cover article in Scientific American magazine
– which featured a tidal powered electric generator, complete with description
and drawings.
I recall the contraption looked like two barge-sized flat floats tethered in
place perpendicular to the shore. The
connecting apparatus was like a giant hinge which powered a generator. Power transmission lines ran to the
shore. The non-stop action of the waves
caused the two large floats to crank the power generating hinge back and forth
over and over – as long as the waves rolled toward the shore.
There is also a new technological process that can turn garbage in to its basic components – all of which are useful. It’s like an assembly line, and nearly any type of garbage which goes in one side, can come out the other side divvied up as various proportions of water, dry fertilizer, and a few types of oil – all of