Big Think's response to anti-nuclear emoters' attack

Self-identified environmentalists went to Madison Avenue and got a slick campaign against nuclear energy.
Today David Ropeik wrote about it.

Naive Anti-Nuclear Videos Demonstrate the Danger of Thinking with Our Hearts, Not Our Brains | Big Think:

Five environmental groups have just released a series of videos attacking nuclear power that demonstrate a disturbing and frightening truth, a truth that has nothing to do with nuclear energy. The videos make depressingly clear that our intellectual ability to think carefully and objectively about the enormous and complex threats we face is hogtied by powerful subconscious instincts that produce perceptions based far more on emotion than reason. The videos are a stark reminder that for all the rational firepower of the human brain, the subjective and instinctive aspects of human cognition pose serious limitations on our ability to figure out how to keep ourselves safe 

The videos were produced in part by more strident, absolutist environmental groups, including Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, and the Sierra Club. These groups all advocate action to combat climate change, of course, including clean energy. But to them, nuclear power remains a technological bogeyman that any true back-to-nature environmentalist is simply expected to oppose. Opposition to nuclear energy remains an established belief of the tribe, to be unquestioningly accepted and supported as a demonstration of one’s loyalty to environmentalist values. Which is why a good many greens will cheer these videos, and uncritically accept what they say as true. 

This instinct, to see the evidence the way our groups do, is ancient and powerful. We have evolved, as social animals, to depend on our tribes, the groups we identify with, for our very health and safety. It feels safe to go with what the group says, rather than think independently and take the risk of disagreeing with the group’s belief. That instinct for tribal loyalty may help us feel safe, but as these videos demonstrate, it can badly warp how we see the facts, and overwhelm our ability to keep an open mind and think about things carefully and objectively.

Read the entire work at Big Think.

This work (Ropeik is at Harvard) is not dissimilar to work I noted yesterday by Dan Kahan (Yale).

when "climate change" is unnecessary

I've seen a few condescending references on Twitter to a report that the terms "climate change" and "global warming" are not allowed at Florida's Department of Environmental Protection (DEP).

I'm citing the current article as it provides good excuse to also reference intellectually provocative articles with challenging facts such as:

Those who say they “do believe” [in evolution] are no more likely to be able to give a high-school biology-exam-quality account of how evolution works than those who say they “don’t.”

In Florida, officials ban term 'climate change' | Miami Herald

DEP officials have been ordered not to use the term “climate change” or “global warming” in any official communications, emails, or reports, according to former DEP employees, consultants, volunteers and records obtained by the Florida Center for Investigative Reporting.
...
“We were dealing with the effects and economic impact of climate change, and yet we can’t reference it,” the former employee said.
Former DEP attorney Byrd said it was clear to him this was more than just semantics.
“It’s an indication that the political leadership in the state of Florida is not willing to address these issues and face the music when it comes to the challenges that climate change present,” Byrd said.

Image from Miami Herald article

The image that leads on the web page for the article is of a writer contracted to write a series of educational fact sheets about how to protect the coral reefs north of Miami. ‘We were told not to use the term climate change,’ he said. ‘

Maybe he was told that because it's a stupid thing to do.

Keystone XL: Obama tars Canadian oil, relations

There have been a couple of stories over the past weeks I've commented on elsewhere, so a quick post to pull them together. Unfortunately I'll end with some references to video clips where the US President demonstrates his parochial views on trade.

---

I've felt Robert Rapier is a good energy analyst since I became aware of him following a 60 Minutes story with the exaggerated title, The Cleantech Crash. Vinod Khosla's KiOR was a focus of that that January 2014 report, and in fact it did file for bankruptcy by the end of 2014.

President Obama is Lying About the Keystone Pipeline | Robert Rapier

...when President Obama vetoed a bill last week that would have sped up the approval process for the Keystone XL pipeline, he repeated several false claims which were in direct contradiction to the U.S. State Department assessment of the project. The Washington Post — not exactly a bastion of Republicans out to discredit the President — recently took him to task on these claims in Obama’s claim that Keystone XL oil ‘bypasses the U.S.’ earns Four Pinocchios. The dreaded “Four Pinocchios” is defined as “Whoppers.” A gentler way of saying lies. Worse than their “Three Pinocchios” rating which means “Significant factual error and/or obvious contradictions.” And when the Washington Post is calling out a Democratic President like this, he (and his allies) should recognize that this isn’t just political enemies out to get him.
So what was the big lie that President Obama told? He claimed that the pipeline is for Canadian oil that will bypass the U.S., providing no benefit to the U.S....

DESAL and SMR: Russia and South Korea pursue nuclear exports into new markets

With all the stories about drought causing ISIS, I thought maybe a couple of technology stories on developments in nuclear power plants with a desalienation role might provide enough hope to keep Californians from beheading each other for a while.

SMART SMR Moves Ahead - in Saudi Arabia and at Home | Atomic Power Review

Image from Atomic Power Review

It has been announced that South Korea and Saudi Arabia have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) which includes the construction ofSMART Small Modular Reactor nuclear plants.
This follows the formation in January of a separate company to promote export of the SMART SMR.  See the text of Korea Atomic Energy Institute's press release on the formation of SMART Power Company below:

"...SMART is an integral-type small reactor, developed in 2012 after 15 years of research. It received the first-ever Standard Design Approval (SDA) from a regulatory body for a 100MWe (330MWth) integral reactor. SMART generates only a 1/10 of a large nuclear plant (over 1,000 MWe), but since it is an integral-type reactor it has enhanced the inherent safety by containing major components such as a pressurizer, steam generator, and reactor coolant pumps in a single reactor pressure vessel. It was designed especially for export and can supply a city with a population of 100,000 with 90 Mw electricity and 40 thousand tons of fresh water per day concurrently. ."

You can't be Syria-sh

I hit my 3rd Twitter block last night, for one tweet noting "making science tribal isn't scientific" linking back to a post on work indicating peoples stated positions on things like climate change and evolution marks their membership in a herd, not their knowledge level, and another only linking to a twitter discussion in which the writer of the Slate article that seems to have generated all the attention was challenged on whether the situation in Syria was caused by climate change.

New Study Says Climate Change Helped Spark Syrian Civil War | Slate | Eric Holtaus

We know the basic story in Syria by now: From 2006-2010, an unprecedented drought forced the country from a groundwater-intensive breadbasket of the region to a net food importer. Farmers abandoned their homes—school enrollment in some areas plummeted 80 percent—and flooded Syria’s cities, which were already struggling to sustain an influx of more than 1 million refugees from the conflict in neighboring Iraq. The Syrian government largely ignored these warning signs, helping sow discontent that ultimately spawned violent protests...

A new study ... is the first to examine the drought-to-war narrative in quantitative detail in any country, ultimately linking it to climate change.
“It’s a pretty convincing climate fingerprint,” said Retired Navy Rear Adm. David Titley, a meteorologist who’s now a professor at Penn State University.

A deliberately misleading anti-nuclear hit-piece from Canada's former national newpaper

I'm angry. if you don't want to be angry, don't read on.

In early December, 2014, I had the opportunity, provided by the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO), to see how spent nuclear fuel in Canada is handled, given a history lesson on what planning had been done on handling it long-term, and the current structure of waste handling responsibilities and funding.

irradiated fuel in DCS, just like farmer Tony McQuail's "shit"

I see little attempt to communicate reality in the hatefully misleading Inside the race for Canada’s nuclear waste: 11 towns vie to host deep burial site posted to the Globe and Mail's site. This piece enters the same competition as the Toronto Star's fear inducing anti-vaccination crap.

If this were a news story by a reporter, it would note both Sweden and Finland are progressing with deep geological repositories (DGR), and Finland's regulator just this month approved the next steps towards implementing one.

From the Globe's poison pen piece:

In 2005, after a low-profile consultation with 18,000 Canadians (roughly one in 2,000 of us), the NWMO decided that a deep repository was the answer to its mission.

These weren't the first 18,000 Canadians consulted, nor the last.

Regarding/Opposing Industrial wind turbines in Ontario

A couple of today's articles on industrial wind turbines in Ontario are worth citing, and provide an excuse to reference a slightly older article from a legal firm on upcoming changes to how industrial wind is pursued in Ontario.

New wind energy plan fragile | Stewart Fast and Warren Mabee| | Kingston Whig Standard

Problems with siting wind farms were catalyzed by the Green Energy Act put in place six years ago. The act was very successful in attracting investment and interest from wind energy developers. Fixed 20-year contracts at guaranteed rates were part of the attraction, but just as important was a streamlined approval process that reduced the approval authority of municipal governments and eliminated the need for developers to negotiate for local zoning approval. Residents of host communities had very limited opportunity to influence development decisions.
This lack of influence quickly translated into a drop in support for wind energy locally and generally. 

...there is substantial pent-up frustration in host communities that still have to face new wind projects approved under the old rules. The changes are unlikely to satisfy this segment of the population. It took six years for the province to lose the trust of host communities; it will take at least that long to start building momentum in the other direction.

read the entire article at thewhig.com

Further north, a meeting on a specific project proposal is the subject of PJ Wilson's Chief promises protests, blockades in the North Bay Nugget:

MATTAWA – The Antoine First Nation “will use every means available” to stop a proposed wind turbine development near this community, including protests and blockades.

Infrastructure Ontario's $14.4 billion turnaround

a post from Parker Gallant

When Bonnie Lysyk, Ontario's Auditor General released her report on Premier McGuinty's creation; Infrastructure Ontario (IO), it was very critical of the way they measured Alternative Financing and Procurement [AFP], otherwise known as PPP (public private partnerships). In fact the report suggested they overspent, costing taxpayers $8 billion in tangible costs. The following is an excerpt from the report:

"For 74 infrastructure projects (either completed or under way) where Infrastructure Ontario concluded that private-sector project delivery (under the Alternative Financing and Procurement [AFP] approach) would be more cost effective, we noted that the tangible costs (such as construction, financing, legal services, engineering services and project management services) were estimated to be nearly $8 billion higher than they were estimated to be if the projects were contracted out and managed by the public sector."

In the fashion of IO's previous CEO, David Livingston, currently under investigation by the OPP for the deletion of e-mails while Chief of Staff to Premier McGuinty; they decided to do their best to erase the bad news emanating from the AG's report. What they did was concoct their own story, had it signed by the CEO Bert Clark, their Board of Directors and delivered it to their master; Brad Duguid, Minister of Economic Development, Employment and Infrastructure. The two page letter (three including the signatures of the Board and CEO) doesn't exhibit the tirade exhibited by the Minister of Energy, Bob Chiarelli when he got the AG's “Smart Meter” report but it takes a swipe on what the report had to say.

The letter in two pages, claims IO turned the $8 billion cost to taxpayers into a $6.6 billion benefit for a $14.4 billion turnaround. The turnaround was explained in one short paragraph:

Information on renewables, ETS, markets and emissions

Some challenging reading if you're looking to lock yourself down until the deep freeze subsides:

Energy Policies of IEA Countries 2014Review European Union Executive Summary

...the EU carbon market did not stimulate investment in the decarbonisation of the power generation or other sectors and only contributed to a small extent to meeting GHG targets. In 2012, the power sector remained the largest emitter (38%) when comparing total EU CO2 emissions per sector.

image from IEA via @BSharpEnergy

Instead, national support policies and subsidies for energy efficiency and renewable energies have been driving decarbonisation. The IEA World Energy Outlook 2014 estimated the total value of subsidies to renewable energy in the European Union of around USD 70 billion or EUR 52 billion in 2013, which equals 57% of the global subsidies to renewable energy, with solar PV accounting for over USD 30 billion or EUR 22 billion, followed by wind with over USD 15 billion or EUR 11 billion. The support schemes had a strong impact on the wholesale electricity market, pushing down prices and reducing operating hours for conventional thermal plants. Together with changes in the relative international commodity prices, power generation moved towards coal, away from natural gas, amid changing economics of power plant dispatch.

Ordinary consumer shouldn't eat local in this Climate: Ontario emissions week

some news, or news releases, of the week.

Glen Murray, Ontario's Minister of Earth love -or something like that - this week held court in front of primarily well tailored clean people to introduce a climate change strategy discussion - or something like that. A discussion paper is claimed to "asks important questions to inform a comprehensive climate change strategy and action plan;" Ontario's Climate Change Discussion Paper, 2015.
Parker Gallant continues to demonstrate how the audiences' pay cheques at Ministerial announcements tend to flow from the  Ontario government, this week in Ontario “charities”: giving to other “charities.”

David McLaughlin has a good post on where the Wynne government is going with this climate change show: Ontario’s Climate & Carbon Pricing Policy – Get Ready for Cap-and-Trade.
Cherise Burda's Speeding up climate action in the transportation sector post is also interesting.

I've stated in the past I didn't think this government would introduce a carbon tax as that could be honest, whereas cap-and-trade allows constituencies to be built by gaming the system.
I'm not as sure, but that'd still be my guess.

Then came the farmers.