Tag Archives: Nuclear

Posted on by

Greenpeace’s misleading claims

I’m going to keep today’s rant short. If you use social media, you’ve probably seen this graphic touting China’s growing use of wind power. (Minus the red stamp that I added.)

Rejected.

Rejected.

China has installed an impressive number of wind turbines over the last few years — but nothing close to what the above graphic implies. Here are the numbers you need to see why the Greenpeace claim is misleading:

First: In 2014, wind turbines generated an amazing 153.4 TWh of electricity. That’s more than the total generated by Norway (147.8 TWh in 2012). And, as you can see in the chart below, it’s also more electricity than China generated from nuclear power (130.5 TWhs).

Wind and nuclear electrical generation in China, 1993-2014.

Wind and nuclear electrical generation in China, 1993-2014.

 

And here’s a chart from the U.S. Energy Information Agency showing electricity generation in the United States by source. (I’ve highlighted nuclear generation for 2014.)

Electricity generation, nuclear power, 2014. EIA.

Electricity generation, nuclear power, 2014. EIA.

The grand total for nuclear is 797.0 TWhs in 2014. Admittedly, math isn’t my strong point. But I’m pretty sure that 797 > 153.54.

There’s a bit of sleight-of-hand going on in the Greenpeace graphic and it centers around the word “can.” As in, “China’s wind farms can now produce…” I suspect they’re using what’s known as the “installed capacity” for wind turbines in China. Installed capacity is the theoretical output from a given source. Under optimal wind conditions, a 3 MW wind turbine will produce 3 MW of electricity at any given moment. But to compare the capacity factor of a wind turbine with that of a nuclear power plant is woefully misleading.

China’s installed capacity for wind stand at around 115,000 MW. U.S. nuclear power plants have an installed capacity of 100,000 MW. So, it looks like this is the voodoo-math Greenpeace used for their claim in the graphic.

China is adding sources of renewable generation at a fevered-pitch. Misleading numbers only detract from that story.

Posted on by

Postcard from the Energiewende: Setting Sail on the Sun Ship

The Sun Ship. The world's first commercial PlusEnergy building, Freiburg, Germany. (© 2012 Osha Gray Davidson)

 

For three weeks in late April and early May, I traveled throughout Germany* researching that country’s energiewende, literally, “energy change” — a transformation from a fossil-fuel economy to a renewable-energy economy (that produces only small amounts of green house gases). Germany has by no means completed the transition. But it is on the way.

Most remarkably, especially coming from the United States where politics has become polarized and toxic, Germany’s ambitious goal is supported by all major political parties. The only debate is over how to get there and how fast to go.

In the coming weeks, I’ll be publishing a series of articles about the Energiewende tour (as I like to think of it) at InsideClimate News. Later the articles will be expanded into a multi-media eBook, with photos, videos, slideshows with narration and recorded interviews with some of the major actors in Germany’s attempt to build an economy that is both environmentally and economically sound.

 

* The trip was funded, in part, by the Heinrich Böll Foundation, where I was a 2012 Climate Media Fellow.

Posted on by

TEPCO Releases Fukushima Radiation Map

Radiation map, Fukushima Daiichi, April 23. (TEPCO)

Piles of highly radioactive debris are spread across the grounds of the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant (FDI), in an area larger than New York City’s Central Park, according to a map of the site revealed at a press conference. (For a larger image of the map, go here.)

The map shows some 150 highly radioactive “hot spots” for workers to avoid, says Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) which owns and operates the plant devastated by the March 11 earthquake and tsunami. Radiation levels from debris range up to 900 millisieverts an hour near reactor number 3.

A dose of 1,000 millisieverts would cause radiation sickness with symptoms including nausea, vomiting and bleeding. Exposure to as little as 100 millisieverts in a year measurably increases a person’s risk of developing cancer, according to the World Nuclear Association, an industry trade group. The likelihood of developing cancer rises with the level of radiation.

(Read the rest of the article at Forbes.com)