Skip to main content

As the debate has never ended on nuclear (unlike the exceptions of some, er...hopes of some...) it seems like hydro-heavy Brazil continues to opt for nuclear.

We get this:

Brazil is planning to expand its nuclear energy output by building five more reactors to augment the two currently in operation, Energy Minister Edison Lobao said on Thursday.

"Despite the recent incidents in Japan, Brazil is sticking to its policy of expanding its nuclear program," Lobao said in Rio, according to a report carried by Brazil's state news agency.

Lobao did not provide any timeline for the construction of the new reactors.

Brazil currently operates two reactors in its sole nuclear power plant located in Angra dos Reis, a coastal town south of Rio.

The facility generates around three percent of Brazil's energy production, which relies overwhelmingly on hydroelectric installations.

I did note that Brazil gets lots of power from hydro, right? Renewable right? However, the high dependence on hydro gives rise to some climatic vulnerability which is driving policy to diminish dependence on it. Despite this, in February 2010 the government approved $9.3 billion investment in the new 11.2 GWe Belo Monte hydro scheme, which will flood 500 sq km of the Amazon basin and supply about 11% of the country's electricity.  However the scope for further hydro-electric development is perceived to be limited. But 11GWs is a LOT of energy. But, but...countries are going to do whatever it takes.

And in South Africa...

Here we learn:

Environmental groups have slammed the government's decision to build nuclear plants, saying it will not lead to energy security for South Africa.

"As for nuclear energy as being our answer to whatever Eskom thinks it will be, that's not entirely true. If Eskom is concerned with electricity security, energy security and safe electricity supply, nuclear is not going to be able to provide that," Ferial Adams of Greenpeace Africa told News24.

Energy Minister Dipuo Peters announced on Thursday that the building process to build new nuclear plants which would produce 9 600MW, would begin by 2012.

Sure, the usual, right? But this AMAZING quote from Greenpeace SA from the SAME article:

But Greenpeace said that the reliance on base load was flawed and that nuclear plants around the world were subject to delays because of safety and regulatory requirements.

"Big utilities around the world have been punting the issue of base load, and saying that we need base load that’s why we can’t move away from things, and then saying that nuclear is the answer to that.

"Base load is not the most sustainable way of us using our energy. We actually lose a lot of our energy supply and Greenpeace has come out with our Energy Revolution, where we show that actually, you don’t really need base load for our electricity supply to work," said Adams.

OH MY GOD! What a bunch of idiots. Seriously. They know renewables can't provide baseload (The minimum 24/7 365 you need to run things like factories that make things like...well...PV, wind turbines, etc). Which they admit, obviously, since they simply choose to ignore the issue by denying it's importance and proposing phony schemes based on living like Hobbits. So, 'baseload'? Who needs it? A hug...

By all means, here is an analysis of what underdevelopment does to people without baseload, and condemnation of Greenpeace's western NGOish...wish to keep people in the dark:

Greenpeace’s plan for India

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site