Michele Kearney's Nuclear Wire - Major Energy and Environmental News and Commentary affecting the Nuclear Industry. Nuclear Activities
Friday, April 26, 2024
Thursday, April 25, 2024
Wednesday, April 24, 2024
[Salon] Congress Passes New Iran Oil Sanctions But Biden Unlikely To Enforce Them - Guest Post
Congress Passes New Iran Oil Sanctions But Biden Unlikely To Enforce Them
by Tyler Durden
Monday, Apr 22, 2024
Over the weekend, as part of the $95 billion package providing funding for aiding Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan which passed by a vote of 360-58 on Saturday, the US House also passed new sanctions on Iran’s oil sector set to become part of a foreign-aid package, putting the measure on track to pass the Senate within days.
The legislation, as Bloomberg reports, would broaden sanctions against Iran to include foreign ports, vessels, and refineries that knowingly process or ship Iranian crude in violation of existing US sanctions. It would also would expand so-called secondary sanctions to cover all transactions between Chinese financial institutions and sanctioned Iranian banks used to purchase petroleum and oil-derived products.
About 80% of Iran’s roughly 1.5 million barrels of daily oil exports are shipped to independent refineries in China known as “teapots,” according to a summary of similar legislation.
Yet while the sanctions could impact Iranian petroleum exports - and add as much as $8.40 to the price of a barrel of crude - they also include presidential waiver authorities, according to ClearView Energy Partners, a Washington-based consulting firm.
"President Joe Biden might opt to invoke these authorities, vitiating the sanctions’ price impact; a second Trump Administration might not," ClearView wrote in a note to clients.
Amrita Sen, founder and research director of Energy Aspects, agreed and told Bloomberg Television in an interview that Biden's Administration is unlikely to “strongly enforce” the restrictions in an election year.
“I think all sanctions are sanctions on paper, with anything that remotely causes oil prices to go up, I don't believe they will enforce it strongly,” the research analyst told Bloomberg.
“What I really want to highlight is this is a US election year, so let’s not kid ourselves,” the analyst noted.
By not kidding ourselves, he meant that when it comes to democratic, liberal ideals, it's all bullshit when they conflict with self-serving interests of the demented deep state puppet roaming the halls of the White House.
Moreover, China is buying most of Iran's crude oil exports, and the majority of buyers in the world’s top crude oil importer are the independent refiners, the so-called ‘teapots’ in the Shandong province, which are not connected with the U.S. financial system in any way.
Therefore, the U.S. doesn’t have any means to enforce sanctions on China’s independent refiners for buying Iranian crude oil, Sen told Bloomberg. The teapots will continue to import Iran’s crude, while any new restrictions could take up to 500,000 barrels per day (bpd) of Iranian oil off the market, she added.
Crude oil exports from Iran hit the highest level in six years during the first quarter of the year, data from Goldman recently showed.
The daily average over the period stood at 1.56 million barrels, almost all of which was sent to China, earning the Islamic Republic some $35 billion.
"The Iranians have mastered the art of sanctions circumvention,” Fernando Ferreira, head of geopolitical risk service at Rapidan Energy Group, told the FT. “If the Biden administration is really going to have an impact, it has to shift the focus to China."
Tuesday, April 23, 2024
Monday, April 22, 2024
National Labs Are in Media Spotlight at Next USEA Briefing -
National Labs Are in Media Spotlight at Next USEA Briefing - micheletkearney@gmail.com - Gmail
Llewellyn King writes
Dear Friends,
The National Laboratories — those great repositories of scientific and engineering ability — have shaped the evolution of energy sometimes in apparent ways, as with natural gas and oil recovery, and sometimes as an invisible hand, perfecting, assisting, counseling and filling out the work of others.
The labs have been at the forefront of almost every aspect of the energy world, from nuclear waste to mastering switching and control of rooftop solar; from looking to decrease the electricity demand at data centers to helping with corrosion control on offshore structures and undersea technology.
The next United States Energy Association virtual press briefing will focus on what the labs are doing to help electric utilities and their associated companies in this current transformative period. It is set for Wednesday, May 1, at 11 a.m. EDT.
A panel of leaders from some of the most critically involved national labs have been invited to meet the press for an hour on Zoom.
These are some questions that might come up at the briefing:
What is going to be the impact of artificial intelligence on the grid both as a consumer of electricity and its role in operating the grid? Is vulnerability affected?
What is research into lithium batteries yielding? Will costs fall and discharge duration rise?
What is being learned about the extended operation of the current aging fleet of nuclear power plants?
What is lab involvement in virtual power plants?
What does lab research reveal about the chances of a carbon-free grid and when will that come about?
What is the most exciting national lab project that affects electricity supply, operation and resiliency?
What are the labs working on across the board?
I organize and host these monthly briefings. Mark Menezes, USEA president and CEO, and former deputy secretary of energy, welcomes the panelists and members of the press and the public in the online audience, and lends his expertise when it is helpful.
The USEA, now celebrating its centennial, is a unique Washington-based organization. It was created as the U.S. chapter of the World Energy Congress and is a non-lobbying, nonprofit organization, supporting all forms of energy. “Energy is good for people” might be its motto.
This promises to be one of the most consequential briefings I have organized for the USEA. It is open to all and there is no charge.
Please use this link to register for it -- and do share it:
https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_cA3K_WMNQfSKifdLyImteQ
Saturday, April 20, 2024
Friday, April 19, 2024
Thursday, April 18, 2024
Wednesday, April 17, 2024
Tuesday, April 16, 2024
Dead Last (With an Emphasis on Dead!) - TomDispatch.com
Dead Last (With an Emphasis on Dead!) - TomDispatch.com
Juan Cole, Playing Russian Roulette with Middle Eastern Oil
April 16, 2024
Sometimes it seems as if it just never sinks in. I mean, it shouldn't be that complicated anymore. It's hardly news that 2023 was a year of unnerving heat globally -- the hottest "by far" since records began to be kept -- including month by month, May through December. And should you think that was an anomaly, 2024 has taken up the cudgel (so to speak), with each new month hitting a startling global record. March was the tenth in a row to do so. Worse yet, as should be all too painfully obvious by now, this isn't the end of something but -- given the continued massive burning of fossil fuels on this planet -- just the beginning, with so much worse still to come. And don't forget the dramatic heating of global oceans and seas, where records are now also being broken in an unnerving fashion.
Yes, of course we know why this is happening. It's not exactly a mystery anymore. Humanity's (mis)use of fossil fuels, sending greenhouse gasses soaring into the atmosphere, is all too literally creating a future hell on earth and a potentially unimaginable world for our children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren. And it's not exactly a secret who's truly responsible for so much of what's now happening. As Thor Benson recently highlighted at the Common Dreams website: "A report released by Carbon Majors on Thursday says that 57 companies were responsible for 80% of the world's CO2 emissions from fossil fuel and cement production between 2016 to 2022."
And anyone who checks out the latest piece by TomDispatch regular Juan Cole, creator of the must-read Informed Comment website, won't be surprised to learn that Saudi Aramco leads that list. Oh, and "in terms of investor-owned companies, Chevron, ExxonMobil, and BP contributed the most to CO2 emissions. ExxonMobil alone was responsible for 3.6 gigatons of CO2 emissions over a seven-year period."
Yet, strangely enough, as I've written elsewhere, we humans continue to fight wars with each other (pouring yet more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere) rather than facing the war on the planet that Big Oil and crew are conducting in a distinctly apocalyptic fashion. (I've long wondered what the CEOs of those companies would say to their kids and grandkids about profiting off the destruction of their world.) Anyway, let Cole take you onto the very planet we're destroying in such a remarkable fashion, with an emphasis on the area in which he's an expert, the distinctly overheating, fossil-fuelizing Middle East. Tom
Monday, April 15, 2024
Sunday, April 14, 2024
Saturday, April 13, 2024
Friday, April 12, 2024
Thursday, April 11, 2024
Wednesday, April 10, 2024
Tuesday, April 9, 2024
Monday, April 8, 2024
Sunday, April 7, 2024
Saturday, April 6, 2024
Friday, April 5, 2024
Thursday, April 4, 2024
Wednesday, April 3, 2024
Tuesday, April 2, 2024
Earth is a Nuclear Planet
Earth is a Nuclear Planet
Earth is a Nuclear Planet: The Environmental Case for Nuclear Power Paperback – April 2, 2024 by Mike Conley (Author), Tim Maloney Ph. D. (Author), Stephen A. Boyd Ph. D. (Scientific Editor)
https://earthisanuclearplanet.com/ (Available at major online booksellers)
Faced by the looming catastrophe of devastating climate change, more and more environmentalists and climate scientists are turning to nuclear power as the cleanest, safest, and ultimately least costly technology for generating the electricity we all need. But there are many myths and conceptions about nuclear energy, irresponsibly hyped by the sensational media, which require to be understood, debunked, and cleared away.
Earth Is a Nuclear Planet goes through all these myths and misconceptions, carefully noting all the fallacies and misunderstandings which plague discussion of the energy options confronting humankind.
Mike Conley and Tim Maloney, two superbly talented popular writers, have spent years questioning a select panel of leading scientists to arrive at a fresh and luminous understanding of the issues surrounding nuclear power. All their factual claims are documented with abundant citations, which some readers will readily skip while others will follow them up. Every scientific claim made in the book has been checked and rechecked a dozen times by fully accredited experts.
On the issue of nuclear safety, Conley and Maloney pay special attention to the notorious accidents, Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima, identifying the misconceptions which prevail, and spotlighting many surprising facts along the way.
About the Authors - https://earthisanuclearplanet.com/#about
Editorial Reviews
“I have always known the half-life example of mistaken fear, but I was amazed to see how many examples the authors of Earth Is a Nuclear Planet found. Writing this book must have been an amazing research project. It has 60 pages of endnotes plus 30 pages of supplements. The supplements are more detailed explanations of things like calculations of mining wastes. By relegating some of the heavy-duty material to a separate section, the authors made the main part of the book very readable.
“For example, the book has several chapters on the Linear No Threshold (LNT) theory: the title of one chapter is ‘No Safe Dose of BS’. LNT claims that there is ‘no safe dose’ of radiation. Since life on Earth includes background radiation, I guess we are all going to die. Wait, . . . wait, . . . we ARE all going to die! But not of the effects of radiation.
“The authors explain that BS in the chapter title means Bad Science. (Of course, it does. Why didn’t I notice that?) For me, reading this book was enjoyable as well as informative.
“We live on a planet with a great deal of natural radioactivity. There are also many ways in which radioactive material can be used for human health and happiness. This comprehensive book is a guide to our nuclear planet and our nuclear future. Please read it!”
Meredith Angwin, author of Shorting the Grid
“Rarely do we find a book that is both extremely entertaining and educational to read. This is one of those rare gems.”
Rauli Partanen, award-winning energy analyst and CEO of Think Atom
“I’ve known for many years that nuclear power is safe, reliable, and one centrally important answer to both air pollution and global warming. What I hadn’t realized is how entertaining a discussion can be of the misunderstandings that complicate its adoption. Earth Is a Nuclear Planet is just that—a great read about a great subject.”
Richard Rhodes, Pulitzer Prize-winning author of A Human History and The Making of the Atomic Bomb
“In this blunt and fact-filled book, the authors prove that we can’t rely on transient energy from the wind and the sun. Instead, we have to charge past unfounded fears about radiation and embrace the staggering power of fission. As B.F. Randall has said, ‘we should be splitting atoms, not mining them’. Highly recommended!”
Robert Bryce, author of A Question of Power: Electricity and the Wealth of Nation
“A must-read for anyone, but particularly fellow Greens and environmentalists who seek a balanced perspective on nuclear energy's potential to shape a sustainable and carbon-neutral future.”
Mark Yelland, founder of Greens for Nuclear Energy
“Cleverly demystifies radiation and delivers a well-sourced perspective on our clean energy choices.”
Rich Powell, CEO of Clear Path and Clear Path Action
“If understanding is the antidote to fear and ignorance, then this book is strong medicine. Comprehensive, informative, and fun, it tells the truth about nuclear power and debunks the widespread misinformation about it.”
Joshua Goldstein, author of A Bright Future, co-scriptwriter with Oliver Stone of Nuclear Now
“The policies we adopt in this decade will determine the planet’s climate for the next ten thousand years. There is one proven path to safety: nuclear power. Anyone seeking a thorough explanation of this path will find it in this book. The authors cover matters from the disposal of nuclear waste to how the health effects of radiation came to be misunderstood, with full technical detail yet in a readable and even entertaining style.”
Spencer Weart, author of The Rise of Nuclear Fear
“An outstanding primer in a crowded field. The authors have delivered a deeply-informative and well-paced journey through the topic, full of terrific explanations which I look forward to adding to my own communications toolkit. It’s an enjoyable trip up the learning curve, which I wish was available fifteen years ago! With so much at stake in our energy future, our opinions need to be factually informed. This is a great resource for those embarking on that journey.”
Ben Heard, founder of Bright New World
“Lays to rest the myths we have been told about nuclear power, and gives us hope that we can shift to green energy—abundant enough not just to replace fossil fuels, but to help lift the developing world out of poverty as well.”
Kerry Emanuel, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Science, MIT, and publisher of over 200 peer-reviewed scientific paper
“A deeply-researched wealth of knowledge, tied together in a cohesive narrative discussing the misperceptions, bad science, and fundamental truth about nuclear power. The authors’ final paragraph sums it all up: ‘A practical solution to the issues we face already exists, and it’s already been proven at scale. The only obstacle is nuclear fear’.”
Ray Rothrock, nuclear engineer, philanthropist, and venture investor
“Earth Is a Nuclear Planet is a science-focused, passionate rebuttal that aptly addresses and dispels the panic that has been disproportionately directed at the clear advantages of splitting the atom.”
Kyle Hill, award-winning science educator and science communication advisor to the White House.
“Earth Is a Nuclear Planet is the real story of why we are late—but it’s not too late for our young people’s future.”
Dr. James Hansen, world-renowned climate scientist
“Nothing in life is without risk. Striking the balance between the risks and benefits of different methods of energy production is paramount. For many years, public attitudes to the risks associated with nuclear power have been led by urban myths rather than scientific evidence. Part of the problem is finding a way to explain a complex area of science in an understandable way. This book seeks to do just this and should lead to a more informed discussion over energy policy in the future.”
Dr. Geraldine Thomas, Director of Chernobyl Tissue Bank
About the Author As a lifelong science nerd, MIKE CONLEY became interested in nuclear power in 2010, and quickly saw that the field was in dire need of writers who could explain the technology to the average reader. So he joined the Thorium Energy Alliance, met dozens of scientists and engineers, and made them an offer: “You explain it to me and I’ll explain it to the world.”
The son of a career naval officer, Mike Conley has lived in Yokohama, Oslo, Idaho, Washington, Nevada, Arizona, Illinois, Maryland, Hawaii, and California, and has backpacked through Thailand and Cambodia. Born in Chicago, he’s been a resident of Southern California since 1967 and has lived in the Echo Park Hills of Los Angeles since 1994, working on screenplays for Hollywood.
TIM MALONEY, PH.D., is a graduate of Case Institute of Technology and the University of Toledo. He has been a start-up engineer and a professor of electronic technology and wrote the standard textbook, Modern Industrial Electronics.
Monday, April 1, 2024
Sunday, March 31, 2024
Saturday, March 30, 2024
Friday, March 29, 2024
Thursday, March 28, 2024
Of Life and Lithium - TomDispatch.com
Of Life and Lithium - TomDispatch.com
Joshua Frank, As the Rich Speed Off in Their Teslas
March 28, 2024
Let's face it: we're now on a different planet in a different era and it matters not at all that a committee of the International Union of Geological Sciences wasn't yet willing to officially call it the Anthropocene or (all too) human age. I mean, why sweat about that when, in a distinctly overheating world, we have so much else to sweat about? Call it what you will, but thanks to humanity, we're already sweating big time -- and not just in South Sudan, where schools were recently closed for two weeks in expectation of a heat wave that could hit 113 degrees! After all, last year set a dazzling record for heat and the U.N.'s weather agency, the World Meteorological Organization, expects 2024 to repeat the pattern in some equally grim fashion. It's already sounding a "red alert," warning that, as the organization's secretary-general recently put it, “never have we been so close -- albeit on a temporary basis at the moment -- to the 1.5C lower limit of the Paris Agreement on climate change.”
In that context, it's no small thing that, just the other day, the Biden administration issued an important new climate regulation designed, as the New York Times reported, "to ensure that the majority of new passenger cars and light trucks sold in the United States are all-electric or hybrids by 2032." And on a planet where startling heat records were set monthly in 2023 and the same thing may indeed be happening again this year, that is no small thing.
Those words "no small thing," however, do trigger something else in my mind. It's a subject that TomDispatch regular Joshua Frank, author of Atomic Days: The Untold Story of the Most Toxic Place in America, takes up vividly today. It's no small thing that some of the same creatures responsible for heating this planet to the figurative boiling point now have the urge to try to "save" the planet. And while that's a distinct positive, don't think those creatures, who have already created so many problems, won't create more as they try to -- so to speak -- change gears.
Ah, gears! Yes, if we humans remain in the same gear as we try to solve the problem of climate change that we've been in while creating it, count on this: there will be a steep price for all too many of us. Think, for instance, of the parts of the Global South that had so little to do with creating the conditions for climate change in the first place or, in the case of the lithium that Frank focuses on today, both Native Americans and the land itself. We are, after all, the very same creatures who created the problem, so hold your hat as the "solution" comes down the line. The question remains: Who will pay what price in the perilous future to come? And how large might it be? Tom
"The Tyranny Of Oil" Revisited - Robert Bryce
"The Tyranny Of Oil" Revisited
Reprinting a chapter from my 2014 book, Smaller Faster Lighter Denser Cheaper, on EVs, energy density, and why “oil is a miracle substance”
Mar 28, 2024
During the 2007 announcement of his presidential bid, Barack Obama said “Let's be the generation that finally frees America from the tyranny of oil.” Photo credit: Chicago Sun-Times.
The International Energy Agency recently reported that global oil demand grew by 2.3 million barrels per day in 2023. The agency expects oil use to increase by 1.2 million Bbl/d this year. Meanwhile, OPEC expects oil use to jump by 2.2 million Bbl/d and by 1.8 million Bbl/d in 2025. Regardless of which estimate is correct, it is clear that oil demand continues to grow along with the global economy. Analyst Art Berman says “oil is the economy.” Indeed, like electricity, oil drives economic growth, and economic growth drives oil use.
Love it or hate it, if oil didn’t exist we’d have to invent it. No other fuel can match oil when it comes to energy density, cost, scale, flexibility, or ease of handling and transportation.
Nearly everything we touch, eat, or wear has been delivered to us by machines that burn gasoline, diesel, or jet fuel. A long time ago, Don Cheatham, a businessman who owned a railroad in Texas, told me, “Without transportation, there is no commerce.” But without oil, there’s no transportation. Therefore, if there’s no oil, there’s no commerce. Despite these apparent points, politicians – Republicans and Democrats alike – have routinely derided the importance of oil to the economy and our daily lives. In his 2006 State of the Union, George W. Bush, a Republican from Texas who tried his hand in the oil industry, declared, “America is addicted to oil.”
Last week, the EPA finalized a rule that mandates U.S. automakers to dramatically increase their production of electric vehicles. By 2032, more than half of the cars they sell will have to be fully electric. Although the agency doesn’t mention oil or gasoline in its press release, it did include “oil conservation” in the final rule. That document, by the way, is 1,181 pages long. The word “gasoline” appears on 117 of those 1,181 pages.
The EV mandate, along with the never-ending campaigns by various NGOs that claim we should go “beyond oil,” as well as Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s presidential run, prompted me to revisit my fifth book, Smaller Faster Lighter Denser Cheaper: How Innovation Keeps Proving The Catastrophists Wrong, which was published in 2014.
One of the chapters in that book is called “The Tyranny of Density.” It’s as relevant today as it was in 2014, and it even mentions EVs and Kennedy. I created two charts to go with this piece to show the ongoing growth in oil use here in the U.S. and globally. Here’s the chapter:
Among the Mount Everest of inanities ever uttered on the subject of energy, the blue-ribbon winner must be this one: “the tyranny of oil.”
Both Barack Obama and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. have used the line. Obama claimed it for his own in 2007 during a speech in which he declared his run for the White House. While standing on the steps of the Old State Capitol in Springfield, Illinois, Obama said, “Let's be the generation that finally frees America from the tyranny of oil.”
In March 2013, during a speech at Sandhills Community College in North Carolina, Kennedy, a high-profile opponent of the Keystone XL pipeline (he was arrested at the White House during an anti-Keystone protest), said “Now we need to free ourselves from the tyranny of oil.”
That Obama and Kennedy — both of whom went to Harvard — are claiming that a super-high-energy density substance that can be deployed for innumerable purposes, from pumping well water in Kenya to emergency generation of electricity in Lower Manhattan, is somehow bad or even yet, tyrannical, is nonsense on stilts. Rather than talk about the tyranny of oil, the two Harvard grads might as well be complaining about the tyranny of physics. Or better yet, the tyranny of density.
Few substances this side of uranium come close to touching oil when it comes to the essential measure of energy density: the amount of energy (which is measured in joules or BTUs) that can be contained in a given volume or mass. In addition to petroleum’s high energy density, it is stable at standard temperature and pressure, relatively cheap, easily transported, and can be used for everything from making shoelaces to fueling jumbo jets.
Share
Oil’s tyranny of density can be demonstrated by looking at the aviation sector and by doing a tiny bit of math. To make the math easy, let’s use metric units. And let’s focus on weight, as that factor is critical in aerospace. The gravimetric energy density of jet fuel is high: about 43 megajoules (million joules) per kilogram. (Low-enriched uranium, by the way, is 3.9 terajoules — trillion joules — per kilogram.)
Keep those numbers in mind as we look at the best-selling jet airliner in aviation history: the Boeing 737. A fully fueled 737-700 holds about 26,000 liters of jet fuel, weighing about 20,500 kilograms. That amount of fuel contains about 880 gigajoules (billion joules) of energy. The maximum take-off weight for the 737-700 is about 78,000 kilograms, therefore jet fuel may account for as much as 26 percent of the plane’s weight as it leaves the runway.
Obama and Kennedy are big fans of electric cars. Lithium-ion batteries have higher energy density than most other batteries, holding about 150 watt-hours — 540,000 joules — of energy per kilogram. Recall that jet fuel contains about 43 million joules per kilogram, or nearly 80 times as much energy. Therefore, if Boeing were trying to replace jet fuel with batteries in the 737-700, it would need about 1.6 million kilograms of lithium-ion batteries. Put another way, to fuel a jetliner like the 737-700 with batteries would require a battery pack that weighs about 21 times as much as the airplane itself.
Prefer to use a “green” fuel like firewood? With an energy density of about 16 megajoules per kilogram, that same 737-700 would require about 55,000 kilograms of wood. With that much kindling onboard, rest assured there won’t be room in the overhead bin for your carry-on bag.
Even at 35,000 feet, the simple truth is obvious: the only tyranny at work in our energy and power systems is that of simple math and elementary-school physics. Obama and Kennedy may not like oil, and their allies on the Left may hate Shell/BP/Marathon/Exxon/Saudi Aramco/Chevron/Keystone XL, but here’s the reality: oil is a miracle substance. Without it, modern society simply would not be possible.
Rather than condemning the fuel that makes modern life possible, our political leaders should be figuring out how we can make oil more available to more people at lower cost.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)