Even as the White House refuses to concede global warming is really happening, it touts nuclear power as the answer to it.

In all the annals of spin, few statements are as misleading as Vice President Cheney’s that the nuclear industry operates “efficiently, safely, and with no discharge of greenhouse gases or emissions,“ or President Bush’s claim America’s 103 nuclear plants operate “without producing a single pound of air pollution or greenhouse gases.“
Even as the White House refuses to concede global warming is really happening, it touts nuclear power as the answer to it as if it were an arm of the Nuclear Energy Institute(NEI), the industry’s trade group. NEI’s advertisements declare, “Kids today are part of the most energy-intensive generation in history. They demand lots of electricity. And they deserve clean air.“
In reality, not only are vast amounts of fossil fuels burned to mine and refine the uranium for nuclear power reactors, polluting the atmosphere, but those plants are allowed “to emit hundreds of curies of radioactive gases and other radioactive elements into the environment every year,“ Dr. Helen Caldicott, the antinuclear authority, points out in her book “Nuclear Power Is Not The Answer“(The New Press).
What’s more, the thousands of tons of solid radioactive waste accumulating in the cooling pools next to those plants contain “extremely toxic elements that will inevitably pollute the environment and human food chains, a legacy that will lead to epidemics of cancer, leukemia, and genetic disease in populations living near nuclear power plants or radioactive waste facilities for many generations to come,“ she writes. Countless Americans are already dead or dying as a result of those nuclear plants and that story is not being effectively told, Scoop.com said.
To begin with, over half of the nation’s dwindling uranium deposits lie under Navajo and Pueblo tribal land, and at least one in five tribal members recruited to mine the ore were exposed to radioactive gas radon 220 and “have died and are continuing to die of lung cancer,“ Caldicott writes. “Thousands of Navajos are still affected by uranium-induced cancers,“ she adds.
As for uranium tailings discarded in the extraction process, 265-million tons of it have been left to pile up in, and pollute, the Southwest, even though they contain radioactive thorium. At the same time, uranium 238, also known as “depleted uranium,“(DU) a discarded nuclear plant byproduct, “is lying around in thousands of leaking, disintegrating barrels“ at the enrichment facilities in Oak Ridge, Tenn.; Portsmouth, Ohio, and Paducah, Ky., where ground water is now too polluted to drink, Caldicott writes.
Fuel rods at every nuclear plant leak radioactive gases or are routinely vented into the atmosphere by plant operators. “Although the nuclear industry claims it is ’emission’ free, in fact it is collectively releasing millions of curies annually,“ the author reports.
Speaking of safety, since the Three Mile Island(TMI) plant meltdown on March 28, 1979, some 2,000 Harrisburg area residents settled sickness claims with operators’ General Public Utilities Corp. and Metropolitan Edison Co., the owners of TMI.
Area residents’ symptoms included nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, bleeding from the nose, a metallic taste in the mouth, hair loss, and red skin rash, typical of acute radiation sickness when people are exposed to whole-body doses of radiation around 100 rads, said Caldicott, who arrived on the scene a week after the meltdown.
David Lochbaum, of the Union of Concerned Scientists, believes nuclear plant safety standards are lacking and predicted another nuclear catastrophe in the near future, stating, “It’s not if but when.“ Not only are such plants unsafe but the spent fuel is often hauled long distances through cities to waste storage facilities where it will have to be guarded for an estimated 240,000 years.
“The magnitude of the radiation generated in a nuclear power plant is almost beyond belief,“ Caldicott writes. “The original uranium fuel that is subject to the fission process becomes 1 billion times more radiactive in the reactor core. A thousand megawatt nuclear power plant contains as much long-lived radiation as that produced by the explosion of 1,000 Hiroshima-sized bombs.“

A Eurobarometer opinion survey on energy technologies published on January 9 by the European Commission shows that 60 percent of EU citizens think that energy research should be a priority for the European Union. The report also shows that Europeans are highly positive about renewable energies. In the future Europeans expect the use of fossil fuels to drop, to be replaced by renewable energy. The commission has also published a scientific report which looks at energy consumption up to 2050.
It examines several future scenarios, including a strong carbon constraint regime and development of hydrogen as an energy carrier. Both scenarios, which show a rising role for renewable and nuclear energy in Europe’s future, rely on advances in technologies such as carbon capture & storage, low energy buildings, low emission cars and hydrogen production from renewable and nuclear sources, Egovmonitor.com said.
“Europeans recognize that new technologies could have a very big impact on the energy system of the future and they expect more cooperation at European level to develop such technologies“ said European Science and Research Commissioner Janez Potocnik. “At EU level, we will invest over Û6 billion on energy-related research over the next 7 years, and we will work with Member States and industry to get the most out of these investments.“
The Eurobarometer survey questioned Europeans on a range of issues linked to Europe’s energy future. Europeans are aware of many of the major issues in this policy area, such as energy dependency and the energy mix of fossil fuels, renewable sources and nuclear.
The survey examines attitudes and behavior regarding energy consumption, with a majority (54%) considering reducing this as a priority. The survey also shows that energy prices are a major concern for Europeans with 33% identifying prices as the first energy-related issue coming to mind and 76% considering that energy prices will double in the next 3 years.
The Commission has also released the WETO-H2 study. This research study, carried out by scientists in France, Belgium, the Netherlands, UK and Poland, as well as the Commission’s DG Joint Research Centre, identifies a reference projection of the world energy system in 2050 and looks at two varying scenarios: a carbon-constraint case and a hydrogen case.
In the reference case, world energy consumption doubles by 2050. Oil and gas supplies reach a plateau, i.e. neither a peak in oil, nor abundant and cheap oil and gas.
The developing world represents two-thirds of world energy consumption and coal is seeing a return as an important source of electricity. Under this reference case, world levels of CO2 emissions will be above what is considered sustainable in Europe, i.e. global average temperatures more than 2¡C above pre-industrial levels, although European emissions will be 10% lower than today and 70% of electricity in Europe will be derived from non-carbon sources (renewable, nuclear and carbon capture & storage). The carbon constraint scenario looks at the impact of much more ambitious policies to restrict carbon emissions, firstly in the industrialized world with developing countries taking action later.
In this scenario there is accelerated take-up of renewable and nuclear energy and advances in energy technologies. The hydrogen scenario assumes additional breakthroughs that increase the cost-effectiveness of hydrogen technologies, leading to a tenfold increase in hydrogen production between 2030 and 2050, 90% of which is from non-carbon sources. In this scenario, hydrogen provides about one third of energy consumption in the transport sector.

Xcel Energy and the US Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory Tuesday unveiled a unique facility that uses electricity from wind turbines to produce and store pure hydrogen, offering what may become an important new template for future energy production.
Several dozen journalists, environmental leaders, government officials and Xcel Energy managers today toured the joint venture, which is located at NREL’s National Wind Technology Center between Golden and Boulder, Colo.
“Today (Tuesday) we begin using our cleanest source of electricity-Ðwind power--to create the perfect fuel: hydrogen,“ said Richard C. Kelly, Xcel Energy chairman, president and CEO. “Converting wind energy to hydrogen means that it doesn’t matter when the wind blows since its energy can be stored on-site in the form of hydrogen.“
The facility links two wind turbines to devices called electrolyzers, which pass the wind-generated electricity through water to split the liquid into hydrogen and oxygen. The hydrogen can be stored and used later to generate electricity from either an internal combustion engine turning a generator or from a fuelcell. In either case, there are no harmful emissions, and the only by-product from using the hydrogen fuel is water. On site is a new building that houses the electrolyzers and a device to compress the hydrogen for storage; four large, high-tech tanks to store the hydrogen; a generator run by an engine that burns hydrogen; and a control room building, where computers monitor all the steps of the process. Xcel Energy and NREL are each paying part of the $2 million budget for the two-year project, Physorg.com reported.
“The project allows our researchers to compare different types of electrolyzers and work on increasing the efficiency of a wind-to-hydrogen system,“ said Dan Arvizu, NREL director. “And, it has the potential to point the way to a completely emissions-free system of making, storing and using energy.“
Currently, there are limitations to both wind power and hydrogen. Wind farms only generate electricity when the wind is blowing, which is about one-third of the time in the United States. This creates the need for backup generation, which is usually fossil-fueled. Hydrogen, while the most common element in the universe, isn’t found in its pure form on Earth and must be either electrolyzed from water, or stripped out of natural gas, which are energy-intensive processes that result in greenhouse gas emissions.
“By marrying wind turbines to hydrogen production, we create a synergy that systematically reduces the drawbacks of each,“ Kelly said. “Intermittent wind power is converted to a stored fuel that can be used anytime, while at the same time offering a totally climate-friendly way to retrieve hydrogen, to power our homes and possibly cars in the future.“
NREL and Xcel Energy expect to offer a public update on the operation of the project around the middle of 2007. Results will also be shared with the Hydrogen Utility Group, made up of Xcel Energy and nine other utility companies interested in hydrogen’s future role in the utility industry.
“Advancing knowledge and sharing innovation are among NREL’s primary goals,“ Arvizu said. “Our growing strategic partnership with Xcel Energy--especially on this project--helps us reduce the time and effort between research discoveries and sharing the benefits of what we learn with energy consumers.“

As a minister meets the building industry to discuss ways to make new housing more energy efficient, artist Clare Bull explains what it is like to live in the country’s first environmental showhome.
It contains hundreds of environmentally-friendly features including a solar thermal system which provides 50 percent of the energy needed for water heating.
The experience I had in the EcoHouse was fantastic. I’m very keen on environmental issues and really want to reduce my carbon footprint.
The EcoHouse is a showhome but I lived there is if it was my real house and it was inspiring to see how easy it was to live like this.
According to BBC, all the energy in the house was from an environmentally-friendly source. My previous house was not eco-friendly in any way and this was something I really wanted to learn about.
The thing about the EcoHouse is that it isn’t that different from a normal house. Daily life isn’t affected really because you are living in a way that helps the environment.

Compost Toilet
If you walked around it you wouldn’t realize you were in a home that wasn’t normal. The heating is exactly the same as it would be and you control it in the same way, except it’s coming from a renewable source.
There is a photovoltaic system and solar panels on the roof. The photovoltaic system uses energy from the sun to provide electricity and the solar panels heat water.
I never had any problem at all with the heating.
In the bathroom there is a compost toilet. Moisture and any smells are sucked away by a fan and the rest is kept in a container where it turns to dust.
Every three months or so you can empty the dust into your garden.
There are taps which immediately switch off when your hands are not under them so water is not wasted.
In the cupboard I had three bins. One for compost, one for recycling and a landfill bin. So it just meant you had to divide your rubbish up before throwing it away.
The only thing I would say is that the wind turbine on the roof was a bit noisy. I would recommend people think carefully where they put them if they buy one.
Overall living in the house was easy, apart from the visitors occasionally tramping through, as it was a showhome.
I could see a future where homes like this are common. But people will need to do much more even than this to help the environment.
Elizabeth Dunn, 31, a child mental health specialist, lives in a key worker housing association property in Brixton, south London, which was built to minimize carbon emissions.
It features a number of energy saving technologies including super-insulation, solar panels to provide hot water and a boiler that runs using non-fossil, renewable fuels.
I moved in to a one-bedroom ground floor flat in July. I’m paying a lot less because it’s a housing association property.
There are solar panels on the roof and a wood-chip boiler which provides heating. Solar panels also provide electricity.
We have got triple-glazing and under floor heating. It is always lovely and warm in the flat which is one of the main things I would say.

’Easy and Cheap’
I moved in because the whole building is carbon-neutral. We have a compost bin. You basically put all your vegetable waste on it and then put it in the garden.
There have been some problems with the wood-chip boiler which have been ongoing. We have been losing hot water.
But I think there are always going to be difficulties with any new system. Apart from that everything is fine.
We don’t have carpets because of the under-floor heating. All the residents are happy with the development.
It’s completely normal. I think it’s so important people start to live like this. It’s easy, cheap and helps the environment.

Homes in Unterhaching, a German town of 22 000 south of Munich, will be warmed by hot water piped from 3 300m underground starting in May. They are at the leading edge of a shift towards geothermal power that may swell Germany’s capacity 1,000-fold within a decade.
“All the experts told us this was not possible,“ said Christian Schoenwiesner-Bozkurt, the manager of the community-owned project. Clean energy subsidies introduced in 2004 made geothermal a cost-effective alternative, he added.
Global geothermal capacity will rise as much as 10 percent a year until 2010, three times the pace of the past decade, the International Geothermal Association forecasts.
Geothermal plants are not affected by oil prices and they face no emission penalties. Unlike wind- or solar-powered plants, they are not weather-dependent and can run 24 hours a day, Busrep.com said.
Geothermal power still accounts for just 9,300 megawatts of generation capacity worldwide, a tiny fraction of the 4,100 gigawatt total. A gigawatt is 1,000MW. Hydroelectric generators have 816 gigawatts of capacity and wind farms account for 59 gigawatts, according to the Renewable Energy Policy Network.
Harnessing geothermal energy involves higher initial investments, sometimes requiring years of drilling to map underground heat sources. Potential growth is attracting money. In June US buyout firms Carlyle Group and Riverstone Holdings said their $685 million (R4.7 billion) renewable energy fund had invested in the start-up of California’s Bottle Rock geothermal power plant after 16 years of inactivity.
Companies that make turbines and generators for geothermal plants stand to benefit. In July Israel-based Ormat Industries and its partners won a $600 million contract to develop 340MW of energy in Indonesia, the largest steam power order ever awarded.
In Unterhaching, geothermal energy will produce electricity as well as heat. Power from a 3.4MW generator will be sold to distributors for three times Germany’s average 2005 electricity cost.
Germany may have more than 200MW of geothermal power generating capacity by 2016, according to government forecasts. Today the country’s sole working plant produces just 200 kilovolts, or 0.2MW.
In New Zealand, a 90MW, NZ$275 million (R1.3 billion) plant now under construction will be the largest geothermal project since 1989. The Kawerau plant will boost the country’s geothermal capacity by 25 percent. Doug Heffernan, the chief executive of Mighty River Power, which is building the plant, said: “Geothermal is going into a renaissance age. It’s the only reliable renewable.“