Recently read the NYT article: "Pipe Leak at Nuclear Plant Raises Concerns"

In yesterday's posting, I spoke about the recent speaking engagement at Columbia University with Peter Lyons, one of the Commissioners at the NRC. He talked in great detail about the advantages of nuclear energy, so this article today grabbed my attention. There has been a lot of attention given to the "carbon neutrality" of nuclear power, but the focus should really be on the safety of a nuclear plant. One disaster could lead to a destruction of immense proportion, so we must focus on this issue with the utmost concern.

The NYT article talks about a leak in the pipes at one of the nuclear plants in upstate N (Buchanan, N.Y.).

My brothers recent article: "Resurrecting a Green Babylon: How Solar Energy Can Help Build Iraq" by Rami Turayhi

Please read this op-ed piece written by my brother, another energy enthusiast.

Discussion at Columbia: "Examining A Carbon-Free Alternative" - U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissioner, Dr. Peter Lyons - April 29th

Yesterday I attended a discussion by Peter Lyons, one of the four Commissioners of the NRC. Peter Lyons focused his discussion on the NRC's role as a regulatory agency for nuclear power reactors at the commercial and civilian level. According to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, the NRC's duties include being able to "assure adequate protection of public health and safety in operation of nuclear generation". Other legislation, such as the National Environmental Policy Act is important in recognizing the duties of the NRC. The Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) is another agency that helps "promote excellence in the power of nuclear generation". Unlike the NRC, which has the authority to pull licenses and stop a nuclear plant from operating, the INPO has other ways of enforcing its rules. For instance, the INPO is the sole authority that decides the rates of insurance numbers for all operating plants, so complying within their guidelines is beneficial to the bottom line for all plants.

As most of you can imagine, building new nuclear plants is a daunting task. We have not seen a lot of new plant construction in the United States, and the last permit was issued decades ago in 1978. There are 104 plants operating in the US currently, and 120 plant orders have been canceled. So there are MORE plants canceled than even operating in existence in the US. Given the difficult process and approval schemes with regulatory, legal, and financing nuclear plants, it is extremely difficult to actually complete a nuclear plant and bring it online. In the nuclear generation community, it is well known that the process is extremely rigid and the chance of plants withdrawing midway through a project is the almost generally expected.

Many critics of nuclear energy say that the issues of safety, and nuclear waste are not worth the benefits of this carbon free energy source. However, in France and other countries, many of the nuclear plants reprocess their nuclear waste. This issue is yet to be decided in the United States. Other issues that come up are capital costs, project finance, and investments. Is there cash available to build these plants? And lastly, nuclear plants face Regulatory enforcements that they must comply with.

Renewable energy has become a popular topic in the Untied States and abroad. A lot of people are asking about nuclear power as an alternative energy source. We all know that France is a huge nuclear player and considering nuclear generation is carbon neutral (it does not produce any carbon emissions), many energy companies are fighting for the right to promote nuclear power as a renewable energy source. Other energy sources have a high carbon footprint, and given the cap and trade scheme that may possibly play out this next year in the United States, this could be a huge selling point. Peter Lyons talks about a possible nuclear Renaissance emerging worldwide as the public tries to understand the pros and cons of nuclear power when comparing it to other types of power generation.

The challenges in the future of nuclear power are 1) technology (both current and digital), 2) Communications, and 3) Workforce. In the Technology department, we have very few digital monitors, and the government is very cautious in allowing digital control systems which introduces a new set of failures. In regards to Communications, we have several security issues with nuclear power and its challenging to inform the public without giving away some information that may be problematic for national security. The question remains, "how do we communicate to the topics of risk management, risk analysis, and radiation risks" in a world of potential international threats? And the third topic of discussion, is the workforce. The nuclear engineers in the world today are aging, and we are going to need a lot of new and enthusiastic talent to help lead the nuclear generation field. Our current system in the US is outdated and inefficient. The power plants were built in an earlier time and era and we face several challenges and difficulties as we try to reform legislation and technologies in preparing to build new plants.

The latest response from Congress: Waxman-Markey Climate Bill

The House has been trailing the Senate in talks of the cap and trade emissions scheme thus far, so it's refreshing to see the debate heat up in the House of Representatives in 2009 with Congressman Waxman. 218 members of the House have to pass in favor of the bill for it to move forward. It seems very likely that such a bill will pass with the support of Nancy Pelosi, the President, and the overwhelming Democratic House of Representatives. The negative effects of climate change and the need for a cap and trade scheme are important matters in our nation and we must lead the world towards containing carbon emissions and other greenhouse gases. I cannot wait to see what happens this year.

Videos from the Wall Street Green Trading Summit

Please check this link: http://www.global-change.com/content/videos-2009-wall-street-green-trading-summit

I recently interviewed some of the attendees at the Wall Street Green Trading Summit in NYC, and their responses can be heard when clicking on the video link above.

Interviews are with the following:

David Kirkpatrick, Partner, SJF Ventures
Arthur O'Donnell, Executive Director of the Center for Resource Solutions
Josh Margolis, Co-CEO, CantorCO2e
James Rhodes, Chief Operating Officer. GE/AES GHG Services, LLC

Deforestation - The Amazon Rainforest

I spent the last week in Buenos Aires, Argentina and came back with the realization that I may never get a chance to see some of the most beautiful historic landsites in South America. I've read a lot about Peru's Machu Picchu and Brazil's Amazon ranforest and I always planned to make a trip to visit these two sites, but with work and a lack of vacation time, my dream may never be realized for two reasons. One, I heard that Machu Picchu may close down because of all the tourists that are slowly destroying its landscape. And two, deforestation in the Amazon rainforest is rampant, which is disconcerting for a variety of reasons. The rainforest is one of the top free sources that captures carbon emissions throughout the world, and destroying it would mean that there would be an exponential increase in carbon emissions worldwide. Further, the act of deforestation emits carbon into the atmosphere, so in essence destroying the rainforest by deforestation is like winding a clock backwards.
According to the Huffington Post, new satellite dishes will keep track of the deforestation of the Amazon Rainforest so environmental agents and government officials will have a better way to deal with this type of destruction.

http://www.mongabay.com/brazil.html

Empire State Building is going Green!

New York City is planning on reducing the Empire State Building's energy consumption by 38% a year by 2013. Mayor Bloomberg's PlanNYC 2030 is a rather intensive plan to make New York City energy efficient. Some more information about this plan can be found at this site: http://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/html/home/home.shtml.

Other buildings are going green as well. The reports about the new BofA green building in NYC caught some press earlier this year: http://www.metaefficient.com/architecture-and-building/update-bank-of-america-tower-greenest-skyscraper-in-us.html

In this link, http://www.greenbuildingsnyc.com/, you can find a number of different green building projects in the greater New York area.

Global Warming

The New Administration is prepared to mandate a federal cap and trade program in 2010.While the cap and trade will be on all GHG emissions, namely carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and sulphur , the focus is on carbon dioxide - CO2. Carbon Dioxide is the GHG that is MOST responsible for global warming, so carbon allowances and carbon permits are the terms that the media keeps talking about.

GHG comes from a number of different sources. Here are some of sources for the most common human induced GHG emissions:

1.fossil fuels in cars
2.factories
3.electricity production.
4.methane released from landfills
5.agriculture - and the digestive systems of grazing animals
6.nitrous oxide from fertilizers
7.gases used for refrigeration and industrial processes
8.the loss of forests that would otherwise store CO2

Video Game for the social activits

There is a new "social awareness video game" called Games for Change. This concept basically uses a video game to address issues like poverty, human rights, global conflict and climate change. I heard about it at a Wall Street Green Trading Conference.

http://www.gamesforchange.org/ourwork

Join, play, check it out!

No Republican Support for the new global warming bill

Representatives Henry A. Waxman of California and Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts put together a draft on global warming this week to address climate change in the Untied States. The bill proposes to place a cap on Greenhouse gas emissions by 2020, a rather aggressive approach in the short term. Obama's plan for climate change was to propose a bill that would reduce GHG gases by 80% by the year 2050. I think these two representatives are on the right track because we certainly need to act sooner rather than later. The cost of reducing GHG in the world only increases each year that we allow for unlimited emissions with no cost.

The Spanish island of El Herro - Energy Independent

The above video is a documentary of the Spanish island of El Herro. According to BBC, this will be one of the first places to exist solely on renewable energy sources. Energy independence and an aversion to oil will make this island attractive to long term sustainability. This concept is so necessary. I think all countries, cities, regions strive to become energy independent. Thomas Friedman talks in great lengths about the Danes ability to source a major portion of its energy on wind farms. There are many countries who were severely impacted as a result of the 1973 Oil Crisis and only a few places have reacted to this event by striving to become energy independent. Another location that is creating the very first carbon neutral zone is Masdar City in Abu Dhabi. (http://www.masdaruae.com/en/home/index.aspx)I think its quite calculating that Midde Eastern countries with oil are investing heavily in renewable energy sources. They seem to have the right attitude towards where the rest of the world is going.

Ethanol. A sustainable energy source or a big mistake?

I've been hearing a lot of arguments about ethanol production as a source of fuel energy and I decided to do some of my own investigation. In the book "Plan B" by Lester Brown, the topic of ethanol production is heavily criticized as a new source for energy. The author believes that crop use should be solely for food in a world of extreme poverty and starvation. He also believes that there should be more of an emphasis on true renewable energy sources like wind, and solar production instead of ethanol. Ethanol production may lead us away from the main objective in this quest for long term solutions with alternative energy.

I recently read the article by Newt Gingrich "ETHANOL, PRO AND CON: New energy source means brighter future". Last April, when this article was written, we saw a huge unprecedented jump in oil prices. SUV drivers and American drivers in general were angered by this sudden increase and the need for an alternative source of energy became a topic of importance. The idea of sourcing energy from ethanol production is a hotly debated topic this year. The last Administration approved the use of ethanol as an renewable fuel and allowed for an increase in ethanol production. Newt argues that the ethanol that we currently use today will be replaced with a more efficient type of ethanol fuel and generally praises this new source of energy.

In the PBS website, Jim Lehrer conducts an interview about Ethanol production (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/environment/jan-june09/mixedyield_01-28.html. In this interview, a representative from Climate Central and an Iowa farmer both talk about the pros and cons of ethanol. For farmers, this corn crop turned fuel has helped raise revenues and returns. According to the article, "In 2008, about one-third of all corn produced in the U.S. was turned into ethanol". Some scientists believe that this move to turn corn into ethanol has left a lot of unanswered questions for the future of land and farming. The overwhelming amount of corn production could mean dangerous consequences in the future. All the land clearing for the corn production causes an increasing amount of carbon emissions into the atmosphere. This will also create market problems when the US switches to a cap and trade system. Brazil is one of the top producers in ethanol production, and they are chopping down forests in order to plant this profitable crop. In the short run, we have solved a big problem with oil prices, but in the long term we may look back and regret that we have covered a wound with band aid. Ethanol production may have negative long term consequences, but it certainly does solve a current problem.

Another consideration; with the dangerous amount of carbon emissions in the atmosphere, we are noticing a rise in global temperatures. This could lead to a reduction in photosynthesis, prevention of pollination, and eventually lead to crop dehydration. The effect of global warming is most problematic for corn, which is another point to keep in mind when assessing whether ethanol fits into the solution as an alternative fuel source.