Power Down Resilience Part 2

                                                                                            written 10 November 2019

                                                                                        published 17 November 2019

                                                                         

            Last week I described the impact of the recent power down in Ukiah.  Two successive Red Flag weather events caused PG&E to shut down power for four days, costing over $9M in lost business and spoiled food.  Last year there were 19 Red Flag events, which could have cost over $70M.  From now on, we can expect the grid to power down several times every fire season, the result of 20th century grid design and decades of deferred maintenance colliding with a changing climate.  If we do nothing, our local economy is at risk, along with the state tourist industry and even the California real estate market.

            The citywide system I outlined last time, was just one way we could respond to this crisis.  I have since discovered that I underestimated the amount of land needed for the large array and the installed cost of a large battery.  The 100MW array would be about $200M and the 250MWh battery about $100M. This large expense should be considered as an upper end solution.  It would power the city as usual with no further changes to the rest of the infrastructure.  But in an emergency, we can survive with much less power, requiring less money, but invested in different ways.

            For example, we could install a battery pack in all 6,500 homes in Ukiah. A 13KWh Tesla Powerwall battery would run Internet and phone communications, a refrigerator, and some lights for 4 days or so.  A transfer switch would be required to select key circuits for backup power.  Such distributed storage systems are already being considered by communities in the Bay Area, with a focus on the low income and medical needs populations.

            A Powerwall and transfer switch wiring would cost about $15K per household, for a city wide cost of about $100M.  This distributed storage of 85MWh will cost about the same as one large 250MWh battery, reflecting the economy of scale with the larger installation.  Funding storage is the hardest part of any power resilience plan, since it has no direct economic return, but eliminates the greater costs of a power down.

            Timely installation before the next fire season would require more than a bulk order with Tesla.  The rewiring of each house requires a large skilled work force.  Local solar installers are already busy, so a job training program with this specific focus will be needed.  City inspection staff would have to be increased and the permit process streamlined.

            Once every home has installed storage, a range of options are available to extend emergency power resilience indefinitely by adding some power collection or generation.  A solar array as small as 1KW would suffice, costing about $3K per house, for a city wide total of about $20M.  Homes without good solar exposure could work together, installing a larger array where possible, powering everyone's batteries.  Alternately, a small generator running efficiently a few hours a day could keep the battery topped up.  Maybe the City would have a service bringing large generator trucks around to keep batteries full.

            An essential first step in any power resilience investment is increasing energy efficiency, reducing the power we need.  Two simple upgrades would change all lights to LED's and replace older refrigerators with modern high efficiency models.  The City has had efficiency rebate programs in the past, which could be funded at a higher level to upgrade the entire community in one year.  The electricity saved rapidly repays the cost of the new equipment.  By upgrading lights and refrigeration and installing distributed storage, we can make the residential portion of Ukiah more power resilient in the face of our new normal.  When everyone can stay in their own homes, with fresh food, lights, medical needs powered and emergency communications intact, we are all better off.

            If you like the idea of creating a "power down resilient" Ukiah, sooner rather than later, share these ideas with friends, and email your support to the City Council members below.  

dcrane@cityofukiah.com

sscalmanini@cityofukiah.com

            There is no single way to accomplish this, and we need to pull together ideas from every part of the community.  If we show there is popular support for the basic vision, the Council will make it happen. 

Let's Make Ukiah "Power Down Resilient"

                                                                                              written 3 November 2019

                                                                                        published 10 November 2019

                                                                                                

            Sitting in the dark last week, with none of my normal distractions available, I got to thinking.  We have an aging 20th century power grid which is failing due to 21st century problems. PG&E, for all of its faults, is doing the right thing to power down the system when weather and fire conditions threaten.  Peak winds in Sonoma County were over 100 mph in one spot, and over 74 mph (category 1 hurricane) in many others.  It is prudent to hunker down during extreme weather events.  

            Based on Ukiah sales tax income, gross annual business comes to $640M, averaging $1.7M a day.  This power down lasted 4 days, for a business loss of about $7M.  There are 6,500 homes in Ukiah, and most lost food with no power. At $150 each, that's another $1M. Commercial food losses might be another $1M, for a grand total cost of $9M for this one event.  This is probably an underestimate. 

            The power down of distribution lines actually started 3 days earlier for most of the area, but the transmission line feeding Ukiah from the south was kept energized.  There is evidence that a failure on this line sparked the Kincade fire near Geyserville. In the future, PG&E will probably shut down all transmission lines in threatened areas.  If they had done that this time, our economic loss would have been more than $14M.  

            This fire season has been relatively calm so far.  If power downs had been in place during the 2018 fire season, there would have been 19 of them.  If the grid shut down only 10 times during a fire season, each lasting 3 days, the annual business losses would be about $50M.  Even if commercial and residential food losses were reduced by 50%, that would still add another $10M, for a total annual loss of $60M.  This rough estimate is the cost of doing nothing different.

            Modern life depends on power, and in an emergency, even a little bit makes a huge difference.  If we don't like sitting cold in the dark, we must do something because this problem will bankrupt our community if not addressed, but will cost money to fix.  

            Burying power lines would avoid fire ignition and make power shut down unnecessary, but introduces other problems and requires massive investment from a bankrupt company, taking years, if not decades, to accomplish.  PG&E has over 100,000 miles of distribution lines, of which 24% are underground, at a cost of $3M per mile.  Their 18,000 miles of transmission lines are on towers, because undergrounding them costs more than $20M per mile and significantly increases radiative power losses.

            Some homeowners and businesses have bought generators to provide a portion of their power needs.  This is a short-term solution.  Ukiah power is currently 70% non-carbon, so burning fossil fuel exacerbates the climate issues which contribute to the power down in the first place.  The cost of generators can be significant, and will sit unused most of the time as a sunk cost.  If they aren't maintained and run periodically, they may not work when needed.  Generators operate most efficiently, with longer life, when operated near their rated capacity powering a constant load, and are not well suited to powering a house. Fuel storage requires care, and there is no certainty that more will be available during an extended emergency. Noise is also an issue.  Finally, installing some generators doesn't address the needs of the entire Ukiah community.  Any long-term solution has to recognize we are all in this together.

            We are fortunate that we have our own power system, and there are possibilities available that did not exist even a few years ago: renewable energy collection combined with energy storage.  A generator is a fixed cost device which requires further funding (the cost of fuel) to actually produce power, thus there is no real return on investment. In contrast, a renewable energy collector is a fixed cost device which collects ambient power for free for decades, giving a true return on the investment.  It is time we invest in our energy future rather than just burning money to keep warm.  

            There are many forms this could take, but I will examine one possibility: a large solar array and battery storage system designed to power the entire City of Ukiah at current levels, grid tied during normal operations, but able to stand alone as a micro-grid.  After Hurricane Sandy, east coast communities began investigating and installing micro-grids for power down resilience during weather emergencies.  In California, micro-grid interest is growing due to the last few fire seasons. 

            There are many advantages to designing a city-wide power system.  The power shutdowns and the numerous fires are beginning to affect the tourist industry, which is a large part of our economy. Making Ukiah fully power resilient would be a marketable asset.  During the first power shutdown, which affected the surrounding area but not Ukiah, people in the outer areas were able to come to town for supplies, gasoline, a hot meal, cell phone recharge, and relaxation during a stressful time.  These opportunities were missing when Ukiah went dark as well.  Ukiah with power can be an evacuation haven from surrounding fires, and allow orderly evacuation of our own community if needed.

            Ukiah consumes an average of 300MWhs a day.  To produce that much power in the solar minimum of winter would require a 100MW array and a 250 MWh battery.  An array of this size would cost $100M to install, covering about 120 acres of land. Assuming land costs of $200,000 an acre for another $24M, and including connection to the Ukiah gird, the array might cost $150M.  Grid scale battery costs, falling rapidly in the last decade as manufacturing scales up, are currently $0.275/Wh.  Our Ukiah grid storage battery would cost about $70M, for a total system cost of $220M. 

            To put this in perspective, we must consider what we are already paying for power. At a wholesale power rate of $0.035/KWh, Ukiah pays $3.85M annually, or $77M over 20 years.  Just one shut down a year like the last one, an unlikely minimum, would cost $90M over a decade.

            There are two fixed cost pieces here: the array and the battery.  The array will generate income.  An investment in a solar array buys decades of power in advance, at a fix, inflation proof rate.  The 100MW array in this example is sized to give sufficient power in the solar minimum of winter, so it will produce excess power in the summer, making Ukiah a net power producer.  Over 30 years it would generate $191M at current wholesale electric prices.  The array cost could be financed by the utility selling bonds, or by borrowing the money as a low interest, fixed rate loan.  

            The second fixed coat is the $70M battery.  Since there is no direct return on this investment, this is the price we pay to avoid the larger costs of doing nothing.  Spread over 10 years, the annual cost would be less than the loss of a single power down.  While grant funding might be available, it may require an increase in electric rates, or sales tax.  

            There are energy loan programs at the Federal and State level.  Even PG&E is looking for ways to invest to deal with the economic costs of a power down.  At every level, special funds are available for emergency preparedness. Humboldt County borrowed from the United States Department of Agriculture Rural Development to fund installation of a large array and storage at their airport in 2017.  In 2012, Jefferson County, in Washington state, bought their entire power system from an investor owned utility with such a loan. 

            One large micro-grid is only one possibility.  Maybe there should be 3 or 4 smaller systems, spread around the community. Perhaps small pump storage systems would be cheaper than a battery.  In an emergency, we could survive consuming less power, requiring a smaller investment. Modest collection and storage systems could be installed in every house and business throughout the community.  Installing such distributed systems would require training a large skilled work force.  Decisions about priority of installations would be necessary.  City regulations would need to be streamlined, and utility rebate programs developed and funded.  All this should be investigated and decided by the community.  The City Council can start by making a policy commitment to make Ukiah "power down resilient".

            If this vision of "power down resilience" interests you, I ask you to take two actions.  The first is to email City Council members Steve Scalmanini and Doug Crane, members of the ad hoc energy committee, and Tami Bartolomei, Community Services Administrator (email addresses below).  Tell all three of them you support making Ukiah "power down resilient", and want the council to direct staff, working with community input, to plan how to accomplish this as soon as possible.

            The second action is to send a copy of this document to everyone you know. We are all in this together, even if we live outside the city.  Having Ukiah functioning in a power down helps support everyone in the surrounding area. By spreading the word, building momentum, we can give the city leaders support to make "power down resilience" a reality in Ukiah. 

sscalmanini@cityofukiah.com

dcrane@cityofukiah.com

tbartolomei@cityofukiah.com

What A Week!

                                                                                              written 26 October 2019

                                                                                        published 3 November 2019

                                                    

            I went out onto the deck Thursday evening (Oct 24th), and could smell the smoke from the Kincade fire burning near Geyserville.  Every day I check https://firemap.sdsc.edu, a site showing fires based on satellite information, using color to show where active hot spots are located (click on the icon in the upper right-hand corner, select fires, and then perimeters and satellite detection).  As I write this, the fire is 10% contained, burning northeast, toward Cobb in Lake county. There are suggestions a PG&E transmission line tower started this fire, but investigation is ongoing.  

            Ukiah has managed to avoid losing power in the first two Public Safety Power Shutdowns, but we are due to shut down during the third one this weekend. Conservative critics are blaming the shutdowns on misguided investment in renewable energy by PG&E.  No mention of corporate priority for shareholder return over infrastructure maintenance, or climate change (can't risk offending Trump's orthodoxy that climate change is a hoax).

            In the real world, where the rest of us live, this week the San Francisco Chronicle ran a long article about the die off of 90% of the coastal kelp in the last half decade.  This is an oceanic environmental catastrophe comparable to California losing 90% of the trees within a few years.  The current ocean heat wave has killed coral and disrupted sea life around Hawaii, and the heat blob in the North Pacific has returned, possibly bringing more drought to California.  Researchers recently reported finding seafloor methane, a potent greenhouse gas, bubbling to the surface of the Arctic Ocean, raising local atmospheric concentrations by a factor of 9.  In response, President Trump has announced that the next G7 meeting of foreign leaders will not have any discussion of climate change. 

            In legal matter, it was a difficult week for the president.  Investigations normally start with secret testimony, including grand juries, to get information on record without publicity or compromising witnesses.  Relevant facts are then made public during the trial phase, where the accused can respond. Since the Justice Department under Trump's Attorney General refused to look into reported misdeeds by the president, the House of Representatives has to do it as their Constitutional responsibility, beginning with closed door hearings in front of bi-partisan committees. 

            Testimony on Tuesday by Bill Taylor, recent US ambassador to Ukraine, was reportedly extensive, well documented, and convincing.  The president, with help from White House cabinet members, did illegally withhold aid to our ally Ukraine to pressure them to support his campaign.

            This process under the rule of law was too much for the cult of Trump.  In response to their worsening political situation, and the tsunami of evidence against their leader, 30 minor Republican members of the House stormed the hearings the next day, demanding "transparency", delaying hearings for several hours before losing interest and departing.  

            In other legal action this week, an appeals court heard arguments why Trump's tax returns should not be examined.  The tax records are of interest in a number of cases, involving fraud, money laundering, and accepting foreign bribes or contributions.  His attorney argued that as president, he is immune from not only indictment, but investigation, or even apprehension if caught in the middle of a crime, specifically even murder.  This god like immunity would extend to anyone related to, or working for, the president.  Of course, this is entirely contrary to the Constitution, which was written after a war to get rid of the divine right of a king.  

            Several cases suggest that Russian money, perhaps even mob money, has flowed to Trump and other Republican politicians.  Trump has advocated for Russian positions before being elected, and as president has defended Russia and Putin against American intelligence conclusions, and made unilateral, ill-considered foreign policy decisions which have strengthened Russia's position in Ukraine and the Middle East.  Perhaps Trump has been acting as an agent for Russian for so long that he thinks he has diplomatic immunity.

            While it is clear why Trump and his hand-picked cabinet believes this insanity, since they all face jail time if it is overturned, the real question is how many Republican leaders will violate their oath of office to defend the Constitution.  

            What an interesting time to be alive!

Considering The Nature Of Truth

                                                                                              written 13 October 2019

                                                                                          published 20 October 2019

                                                                                                

            Deep examination shows we can "know" only two absolute truths: "I am" and "something seems to be happening".   Rather than be at peace with this awareness, we elaborate with descriptive stories.  "I am" quickly shifts to "who am I?", with answers rooted in past memories, which are only partial recollections at best.  "Something is happening" becomes a quest to understand "what is happening", requiring description of my current context, framed by further memories, limited by language and social structures. We move from clear awareness to elaborate stories the moment we begin to think about it all.

            The philosopher Kant argued that we can never know objective truth, because our entire experience is filtered through physiological limitations and psychological perspectives framed by cultural interpretations.  Everyone lives in a bubble of their own personal "truth", which is always relative and incomplete.  However, no one lives alone: no self is absolute, but always lives within a larger context.  Even the most socially isolated hermit needs physical sustenance from the organic world. Those of us who live within a social structure have to negotiate even more complex interactions.  How can we transcend our personal "truth" bubble to effectively engage the larger world? 

            What has evolved over time is a two-pronged approach: living within a group with agreed upon social structures for general support, and trial and error for further development.

            Social structures have organized communities of individuals for millions of years, long before humans arrived on the scene.  While the forms vary, their endurance comes from constantly weeding out individuals who don't accept the form.  This can range from shaming or expulsion from the group to actual extermination. In this manner, the relative "truth" of each society member is kept in resonance with the larger group, for mutual advantage.  The history of life, as well as the history of humanity, is an evolution of how social forms deal with divergence within their group and how they engage with groups with different structures. 

            Trial and error can inform individuals or groups as they encounter the larger world.  There is a bumper sticker which says: "Reality is what you stub your toe on".  This points to the fact that, independent of what we believe, we inhabit an effective reality with consequences.  If the structure of our society, or the nature of our personal "truth", is in conflict with this reality, the unexpected happens, even to the point of death. Trial and error is a way to investigate this reality.  When we experience a conflict between our "truth" and reality, like stubbing our toe, we have the opportunity to modify our "truth" before we repeat the encounter.  This can be difficult, since it requires changing our beliefs and social structures, which have psychological inertia and external consequences.  An alternative response is to deny the reality of the "stubbed toe" feedback, blame something or someone else, and proceed as if nothing important happened.  This is very popular in the short run because it requires less effort than real change, but the vulnerability persists since the choice is for continued fantasy over education by reality.  In a rapidly changing world, choosing denial becomes more perilous.  

            This denial is in action today around the issue of climate change.  The "stubbed toe" feedback is becoming more obvious every year, with increasing consequences, but climate denial is tied to religious, economic, political, and social structures which have worked relatively well for a powerful few.  That structural denial has persisted over half a century now, so simple responses are no longer possible, leaving only radical solutions, if any, which creates even more resistance.  Because the conflict is between fantasy and reality, the outcome is inevitable.

            A companion denial is the rise of fake news, with roots in the advertising industry that arose after WW2, presenting fantasy as fact for economic and political gain.  While propaganda and spin are as old as empires, the rise of mass media and technology have brought sight and sound into every home around the globe, making the fantasies harder to distinguish.  The insanity of our current leadership's "truth" bubble has created another Middle East war and global economic chaos, while ignoring issues that threaten our survival as a species.  Again, the outcome is inevitable.

Malignant Narcissist

                                                                                              written 6 October 2019

                                                                                        published 13 October 2019

                                                                      

                        

            A healthy sense of self is important.  A Buddhist friend once told me: "you need enough ego to avoid stepping in front of a speeding bus".  But a healthy person knows "self" is in relationship with the larger world, and awareness of the needs of others leads to compassion.  There is no such thing as an absolute, autonomous self. This simple truth is as close as your next breath, which is the most immediate need for self-survival.  Yet the oxygen we require is freely given to us, released by plants and algae within the last six months.  We are dependent on the massively interconnected web of a living planet.

            Narcissism, an inflated sense of self-importance, is a psychological response to childhood trauma.  Symptoms include an excessive need for admiration, disregard for others' feelings, inability to handle criticism, and a sense of entitlement.  As the narcissistic disorder becomes more extreme, there is less awareness, concern, or compassion for others.  The malignant end-stage expresses as megalomania and sociopathy, where the entire world is viewed as a simple extension of the individual.  

            I first encountered the term "malignant narcissist" as a description of Hitler.  At the end of WW2, when it was clear that Germany had lost, Hitler took this as a personal loss.  He was planning to die and imagined the entire German population should die as well.  He ordered his troops to destroy all critical public works like sewer and water plants, dams and roadways.  Fortunately, most Germans were not that insane, figured there would be life after the war, and refused to follow those orders.

            The second time I encountered the term "malignant narcissist" was shortly after President Trump was elected.  Trump's father taught him there were only two kinds of people, killers and losers, so Trump learned to attack any opposition in his path toward domination. Since his goals are always correct in his own mind, there are no moral, ethical, or legal limitations on his tactics.  His actions in office continue this psychological style.  

            From his announcement speech, he has been attacking, unfettered by factual reality.  The truth is whatever he believes at the moment, by virtue of his belief in it. This is part of the charismatic charm of the sociopath: their absolute, unwavering confidence.  

            Convinced of his "stable genius", he never acknowledges mistakes, blames others, and has no tolerance for contradiction.  With no regard for the workings of government, he did no planning for a transition team when he took office.  Almost three years later, many essential positions are still vacant, or filled with temporary appointees.  Rather than select people with competence and knowledge, he surrounds himself with "yes men" who won't challenge him.  It has taken awhile to find enough totally compliant people, which has resulted in the highest turnover in the cabinet of any president.  The requirement is absolute loyalty to Trump, without regard to the laws or needs of the country.  This insanity makes sense to Trump, because he believes that he, and only he, IS the country.

            Such malignancy at the top means America is no longer a trustworthy ally, and has lost status in the world.  The country is more radically polarized.  The environment is being sold off to the highest bidder, while the rest of the world is awakening to the climate crisis.  The very wealthy pay less taxes, while deficits soar, and we pay higher cost because of the ineffectual tariff war.  Consequently, the global economy is slowing, the stock market has stalled for almost two years, economic uncertainty is increasing, and recession worries are growing.  Trump has embraced dictators and helped destabilize Europe and the Middle East.

            The revelation that Trump blackmailed another country to interfere in the next election, by getting dirt on his political opponent, has precipitated impeachment proceedings.  He supplied proof of his misdeeds, bragged about it, and doubled down by publically inviting several other nations to interfere as well.  This is consistent with his belief that if he does it, it is legal, backed up by his hand-picked Attorney General. 

            It is now time for Republicans leaders to decide.  Are they going to support the Constitution they swore to defend, or allow this corrupt malignancy to define their party and destroy this country? 

             

A Climate Emergency

                                                                                              written 29 September 2019

                                                                                                published 6 October 2019

                                                      

                        

            Risk assessment considers both the magnitude of consequences and the likelihood of occurrence.  For example, a large asteroid impact is relatively rare, but the consequences can be devastating.  An asteroid just 6 miles in diameter hit the Earth 65 million years ago, releasing energy equivalent to 100 million megatons of TNT, driving 75% of all life to extinction.  In 2029, an asteroid 370 meters in diameter will come within 20,000 miles of Earth, a very near miss.  This size impacts Earth about once every 80,000 years, releasing the energy equivalence of 1,200 megatons of TNT, 200 times the largest hydrogen bomb blast. Because of the severity of impact consequence, despite the rarity of the event, billions of dollars are spent every year to monitor the skies for incoming objects.  If a large one on an intersection course is detected, plans have been made to respond, requiring years of preparation and investment of tens of billions of dollars.  

            Abrupt climate change has similar life extinction consequences, and should be treated with the same concern.  While this destruction unfolds over a longer time frame than an asteroid impact, the odds are much shorter, estimated at 1 in 5 over the next century.  We have had warnings for over 50 years, and evidence of increasing change is in the news every week.  While some people think this is a hoax, or a slow moving problem to worry about in the future, the climate is a massive, complex, highly fed back, non-linear system, which has tipping points resulting in abrupt, irreversible changes.

            For many years Arctic sea floor methane has been identified as one of the tipping points.  The Arctic is warming 2-3 times faster than the rest of the planet, and summer ice covers less of the Arctic Ocean each year.  Multi-year ice, thicker and more resistant to melting, is disappearing. The ice-free ocean is dark, absorbing heat which melts ice faster.  The Arctic is a very shallow sea, with almost 2,000 gigatons of frozen methane in the sea floor sediments.  At some point, heating resulting from decreased Arctic ice will raise sea floor temperatures enough to release seafloor methane, heating the Arctic more, releasing more methane, in a runaway scenario.  Over the short run, methane is 80 times more potent than carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas, and a sudden release of 50 gigatons would cause a 1°C temperature rise within months.  

             In the last 30 years humans have burned half of all the fossil fuels ever extracted. Roughly half the resulting carbon dioxide has remained in the atmosphere, a quarter has been taken up by plants, and the remaining quarter has been absorbed in the ocean, where is changes to carbonic acid, increasing ocean acidity 1,000 times faster than previous geologic rates.  A recent MIT report described a mechanism of an ocean acidification tipping point, derived from geologic records. 

            Increased ocean acidity makes it difficult for organisms to form calcium carbonate shells.  Normally, when these animals die, the weight of the shells causes them to drop to the ocean floor, sequestering carbon in the process.  Without this shell driven carbon flux to the ocean floor, acidity at the surface rises, increasing the lethality of the water and reducing the capacity for the water to absorb more carbon dioxide.  Eventually increased acidity crashes the ocean ecosystem, source of food and oxygen, increases atmospheric carbon dioxide levels, and traps more heat.

            Once we pass extinction tipping points, it is too late.  The longer we delay action, the shorter the odds of avoiding this fate.  Climate deniers have wasted so much time that any effective effort will now require massive and sustained investment, like the economic mobilization during WW2.  To preserve our species, a declaration of a climate emergency is necessary to galvanize sufficient economic resources.  In California alone, 24 counties or cities have already passed such a declaration. For more information go to: https://www.theclimatemobilization.org.

            Increasingly erratic weather events, and recent climate strikes mobilized by students, are shifting public opinion.  Younger people have less commitment to the status quo and are more likely to live with the unfolding disasters.  Despite Republican and corporate attempts to denigrate them, we should be inspired by their youthful passion and recognize we are fighting for our lives.

Nuclear: Unending Toxic Legacy

                                                                                           written 22 September 2019

                                                                                            posted 29 September 2019

                                                  

            The American destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki introduced the devastating power of nuclear energy.  Despite ending the war, the unprecedented use of such force on civilians was a public relations problem.  So, America created "Atoms For Peace", generate electricity with nuclear energy, promising "power too cheap to meter".  The first commercial nuclear reactor went online in 1957. Today there are 98 reactors in America and a global total of 488, producing about 10% of the planet's electricity. 

            But nuclear power has never been too cheap to meter.  Reactors are expensive to build, running over budget and behind construction schedule.  The relatively small number constructed precludes the advantages of mass production. Unforeseen problems produced design changes and costs overruns.

            Compared to efficient gas fired plants or renewable energy, a nuclear plant is not cost effective.  The investment bank Lazard calculated the following operating costs per mega-watt hour: nuclear at $97-$136, combined cycle gas at $52-$78, grid scale thin film solar at $50-$60, and wind at $32-$77.  Renewable costs are going down as manufacturing scales up, and reactor costs are increasing.  Utilities are shutting down existing reactors before the end of their design life, with few orders for new reactors, because nuclear is a free market failure.

            But nuclear boosters never give up.  The current promise is that nuclear is "green" energy, and can help deal with the climate problem.  But this is as misleading as the promise of free electricity, even though some important environmentalists support this path.  While it is true that a nuclear plant produces no CO2 during normal operation, it is important to look at the whole life cycle of a plant.  This includes the energy to produce the fuel, build the plant, and dismantle it at the end of life.

            A recent IPCC life cycle study reported nuclear was better than solar on carbon emitted.  The study calculated grams of carbon released per kilowatt-hour over the life of the equipment: natural gas at 469g, solar PV at 46g, nuclear at 16g, and wind at 12g.  Not included was the carbon cost of decommissioning a reactor, or disposing of radioactive waste, problems unique to nuclear power.  This omission is understandable because there is little experience with either issue.  

            Of the 150 reactors that have shut down, only 19 have been completely decommissioned, with just 10 returned to "greenfield" condition, free of all radiation contamination.  Most of the decommissioned reactors were relatively small compared to the 1,000MW units in general use.  Decommissioning is expensive, costing almost $1B for large units, and can take decades, because reactors are not designed to be dismantled, and everything is radioactive, not recyclable, requiring special disposal.  Entombment in place is cheaper than dismantling, but leaves a toxic legacy for centuries.  The International Atomic Energy Agency estimates $1T to entomb the entire fission industry.  

            Decommissioning a damaged reactor is more expensive and time consuming, because of the increased radioactivity.  Fukushima is estimated to cost $100B and take 4-5 decades, which are optimistic guesses. Chernobyl blew up 30 years ago.  Despite the $20B already invested, the second containment effort is about to fail. 

            Nuclear power requires fuel rods be reprocessed, creating quantities of highly radioactive waste, which can be diverted into nuclear weapons.  Only time can destroy radioactivity, and secure geologic sequestration is the only strategy developed so far.  Despite 70 years of nuclear production there are few high-level waste depositories in operation, leaving most of the burden stored at reactors or fuel reprocessing sites.  The last proposal for the Yucca Mountain repository in Nevada included air conditioning for a century in order accommodate more material, with uncalculated carbon emissions.  

            This waste is the grossest example of externalized costs, where a few take the immediate profits, and leave the costs to everyone else.  The nuclear industry has consistently minimized concerns about the health impact of radioactive material, allowing unaccounted dispersion of this contamination.  Some is toxic for over 100,000 years, burdening thousands of future generations.  

            Climate change is a huge challenge, a symptom of our disregard for the connected whole.  Radioactive contamination is another symptom of that disregard.  It is morally repugnant to avoid carbon by creating this toxic legacy.  "Green" is a healthy and sustainable future: nuclear power is neither.