The ecological interest of the nuclear energy

September 20 2015, 13:38pm

Posted by malicorne

Yes, the nuclear energy can make a positive contribution in the environmental protection, in the fight against the greenhouse effect and in the human development. It supposes responsible operators, effective Public authorities, and concern shared on the long term and on the general interest. First of all, it should be reminded that the nuclear energy is a natural energy in the same way as the wind energy or as the sun.

Nuclear natural reactors worked on Earth by producing some plutonium, fissile material natural as is it the uranium, and by products of reactions nuclear power, the nuclear waste. The great majority of the nuclear waste remain today not exploitable. Certain rare earth elements present in the nuclear waste could be valued but their extraction is today not competitive.

These natural nuclear reactors worked in Africa near Oklo in the Gabon, during thousands of years, there are two billion years. They establish invaluable landmarks for the implementation of a long-term ultimate passive protection for the not recoverable nuclear waste. Today, in France, the nuclear waste are managed with the highest attention, on behalf of the nuclear operators, as of public authorities. The interest of the french project CIGEO is being able to set up for the ultimate waste a passive protection of very long term without human intervention to protect itself of any loss of vigilance on the subject.

The nuclear industry is the only industry today having such a concern on the very long term and thus future generations, and which goes beyond historic time.

Secondly, the nuclear energy is a concentrated source of energy which allows to have a big lever of scale and thus to save the human and financial committed resources by developing the added value.

She so allows an access for a clean energy for one very large number, with an unsubsidized competitive price, by integrating the complete costs including the final demolition of reactors and ultimate treatment of waste.

This mobilization is largely made but not only by the grey cells, what allows to save so many primary resources, (land space, materials, natural resources).

The competitiveness of the French nuclear electricity is demonstrated every day by the positive exporting balance of France in the electro-nuclear industry, as in the electricity produced by nuclear power, from now on decades. For the electricity, the positive balance amounts for France to two billion euros every year since more than ten years now.

This competitiveness of the French nuclear electricity does not constitute in itself a reason to waste this electricity, and this energy, in particular by stopping prematurely and pointlessly a safe and competitive installation such as the factory of Fessemheim can be it.

In the third place, the nuclear, still young energy, is and will remain an industry to risks. The industrial undertaking concern of the nuclear industry dates only for half a century while the life cycle of an actual industrial nuclear reactor is situated on the scale of a century: Three quarters of hundred reactors in operation in the United States already have an authorization to work over sixty years, and the studies are engaged to go to 80 years. The tens of reactors which start worldwide, in particular in Asia, but also in Europe and in America today, will still be for the greater part in exploitation in XXII rd century.

The nuclear industry knew how to develop principles of safety, taken into account from the design, (the redundancy and the diversification, the in-depth defense) which allowed Europe to know no serious accident with total fusion of the core of reactors, except the serious accident (international scale INES, level 5) of Winscale on October 10th, 1957 in United Kingdom, which was not an industrial reactor. Today in Europe, it is more than 2000 years of experience accumulated by operation of industrial nuclear reactors without serious accident in 15 countries of Europe.

These principles of safety also allowed that the serious accident with total fusion of the core (INES 5) arisen in the United States on March 28th 1979 to Three Mile Ilsland on an almost new reactor had no consequence for the population. This accident however stopped the development of the civil nuclear energy on the American continent for half a century and confirmed the importance tuning so much attention on the human dimension as on the technical aspects in the nuclear safety.

The major accidents (INES 7) of Chernobyl, on April 26th, 1986 and Fukushima, on March 11th, 2011, will never have to be forgotten. They created a very strong anxiety worldwide. The requirement of culture of safety, interrogative behavior, rigor, caution, transparency, were confirmed after Chernobyl. Its deployment showed itself insufficient on the site of Fukushima while the risk of tsunami that must be better taken into account was known by the operator.

Japan, France and other countries take into account the experience feedback of Fukushima. This one will put about ten of years at a minimal level to deploy worldwide. The implemented periodic revaluation of the safety in France every ten years allows the French nuclear fleet to benefit from all the available experience feedback at the international level. The international WANO association of the nuclear operators plays an important role to favor the sharing of the best practical between nuclear operators and to favor the detection and the exploitation of the precursory events.

The teachings of Fukushima concern the implementation of complementary margins in the design to protect itself even better some risk of merger of the core in front of extreme natural attacks (tornados, earthquakes, tsunamis) and to free itself from the long-term risk for the population and the territories, including in the hypothesis of a serious accident with fusion of core of the reactor.

I visited the sites of Windscale, Chernobyl and Fukushima in 2013

http://www.malicorne.over-blog.com/visite-du-site-de-tchernobyl-en-mai-2013

http://www.open-dialogues.over-blog.com/2013/10/return-of-fukushima-and-other-places.html

http://www.malicorne.over-blog.com/2013/10/retour-de-fukushima-et-d-autres-lieux.html.

I recommend to every person, operator, nuclear safety authority, elected representative, exercising responsibilities concerning the nuclear energy, to go to visit one of these sites damaged to maintain the memory which the zero risk never has and will never exist, and to appreciate better the relevance of measures taken in conformance with the experience feedback.

These elements confirm authoritarian requirement maintaining the priority one in the nuclear safety in any country which exploits the nuclear energy with a successful experience feedback. First of all at the level of the nuclear operators who are the first ones responsible for the nuclear safety. But also at the level of the Public authorities which have to have competent, demanding and settled authorities of safety. It supposes upstream the existence of States which work and which are effective. It applies to countries " firstly incomers " in the nuclear energy in particular.

The accident which took place in India in the chemical factory of Bhopal, at night from 2 till 3 December 1984, which made thousands of victims, more than gathered Tchenobyl and Fukushima, who has even today unacceptable consequences for the population and the Indian territory, did it lead to suspend any industrial activity in the chemical industry? The last chemical accident in China in Tianjin, on August 12th, 2015, will not stop either the chemical industry, but will question again very certainly the conditions of its development.

The safe and competitive nuclear industry is a demanding industrial activity which owes half-wit guided by the humility with regard to the so low residual risk it is. In such an approach, I consider that the nuclear energy can have all its place in the world energy bouquet, close by and in good complementarity of the shares of energy efficiency and the development of the competitiveness of the intermittent renewable energies. The broadcasting energies of fossil carbon (oil, gas, coal) must be gradually limited in their use with regard to the risk of global greenhouse effect.

Helps inter-countries must be developed in a multilateral approach to allow the least developed countries to join the minimal thresholds of way of living (food, health, education, security) for which every country, every man or woman, is entitled to wait in our time.

The acceptance of the nuclear residual risk, which will never be eliminated, except for eliminating the use of the nuclear energy worldwide, (and there it would be a real wasting,) must be appreciated in the look first of all by the priority one in the nuclear safety carried by the nuclear operators and by the capacity of States to wear a vision of general interest and consideration of the future generations.

It must be also weighed with regard to the geopolitical and economic stakes, and to the added value of nuclear power face to face of the risk of global greenhouse effect and its positive contribution to the at least vital access for the whole world population.

Translation of the article published in French by Bernard Maillard August 24, 2015, on the Blog of Malicorne

http://www.malicorne.over-blog.com/2015/08/l-interet-ecologique-du-nucleaire.html