« April 2008 | メイン | June 2008 »
May 22, 2008
Interview with Yuan-Tseh Lee
In this recent interview, we spoke with Nobel Laureate Yuan-Tseh Lee of Taiwan's Academia Sinica. Below is an edited transcript of our conversation. He shares his thoughts on nuclear power, sustainability, development, and education.
Frank Ling (FL): What are some of the challenges at the interface of science and policy today?
Yuan Lee (YL): The development of renewable energy and efficiency will make contributions in coming years but the urgency of reducing carbon dioxide exceeds the development of science and technology. No single country alone can solve this problem. We will need to change our lifestyle in a drastic way.
FL: Scientists were recently surprised to find that CO2 emissions are rising faster than expected. Recently, you have come out in support of nuclear power. Why?
YL: Safety in plants is no longer a problem. The treatment and waste is. If the urgency for us is to reduce CO2, then nuclear power will be an important option.
FL: One of the gaps is between the social and physical sciences. Has anyone in Taiwan tried to address this gap?
YL: If you look at a Chinese painting, you find that everything in the painting is related to science. Look at this house. Energy and what we eat were all recycled. A hundred years, we were all a part of nature. So we can eat well without using so much energy! Today we waste so much energy.
FL: You have been involved with education reform. One of the concerns today is that there is not enough time to think. There is a lot of knowledge but not a lot of time to wonder about what it means. How do you strike a balance?
YL: We need enough knowledge to ask sophisticated questions. But schools today teach too much. We should learn so that we can do new things.
Click here for an earlier interview with Professor Lee on the chemistry of climate change.
投稿者 econetworks : 06:22 AM | コメント (0) | トラックバック
May 13, 2008
Nuclear Return?
Recent developments in Europe suggest that Japan might need to reconsider it's moratorium on building new nuclear power plants. Instead of banning coal, which is the dirtiest among fossil fuels, Europe is now planning up to 50 more plants in the near future. But why would an environmentally progressive region of the world raise their emissions?
At a time when the US is on the verge of imposing a moratorium on coal, Europe has plans for adding up to 50 new coal-fired power plants. In contrast to scientists who say there is an urgent need to drastically cut our reductions, coal is making a comeback. Does this mean, greenhouse gas levels will continue to rise or are there other alternatives out there?
In an article in the New York Times, coal plants are being built in Germany, the UK, the Czech Republic, and Italy, which already pays the highest cost in electricity. The author says:
"Over the next five years, Italy will increase its reliance on coal to 33 percent from 14 percent. Power generated by Enel from coal will rise to 50 percent.
And Italy is not alone in its return to coal. Driven by rising demand, record high oil and natural gas prices, concerns over energy security and an aversion to nuclear energy, European countries are expected to put into operation about 50 coal-fired plants over the next five years, plants that will be in use for the next five decades."
In contrast to an image of a Europe that is eco-conscious, these trends are driven by economics and energy security. Oil and natural gas prices reaching record levels, and so the only economical option is to turn to coal. At the same time, natural gas comes from Russia and could be affected by instabilities in the Russian government.
This seems contradictory to perceptions that Europe is ahead of the US when it comes to the climate change. Germany has put enormous resources into building up a solar and wind industry. France has many nuclear power plants, which has arguably contributed to lower emissions.
And yet one would think that Europe can continue these trends toward lower emissions but the limitations in squeezing out efficiency and deploying renewables suggest that either energy supplies coming from coal or nuclear are needed for the economy.
Large scale carbon capturing of emissions from coal fired plants have not yet been demonstrated to be successful. And so it may be time to reconsider nuclear power. While the risks of nuclear power are real, it may be one of the options needed to attain drastic reductions in GHG emissions without severely slowing down economic growth.
The debate in the US continues as the government has recently authorized the construction of nuclear power. As unpleasant as it may sound to many environmentalists, a similar public discussion in Japan is needed to better understand the costs and benefits of this source of energy.
投稿者 econetworks : 02:52 PM | コメント (0) | トラックバック
News Review
Highlighting some recent news, the entry of the 230 mpg (100 km per liter) car into the marketplace could be coming soon. Just how much emissions does waste food account for? Let's ask the English! Finally, the UN says $100 billion has already been spent for renewables.
The People's Car
With the price of gas exceeding $4 per gallon in the US, there is surging interest in vehicles with higher mileage. It may not be until we see $5 or $6 that there will be mainstream in converting to hybrids and plug-in electric vehicles.
Several efforts at high mileage have already made the news. Here is another one. This coming from our friends in Germany.
Volkswagen plans to introduce a 230 mpg car by 2010. It is described as a cross between a VW Bug and a bobsled.
Hank Green at EcoGeek writes:
The car's technology comes from it's unique shape and it's ultra-light body. The frame is actually made of magnesium, an extremely light metal, and the outer skin is reinforced with carbon fiber. The one cylinder engine is made of aluminum and sits on top of the rear axle. The car is only a bit more than three feet high and weighs less than 700 lbs.
Volkswagen says the design has been around since 2002 but because of it's design and perceptions over its safety, they have not marketed it. With such a low weight, it is thought that the car would lose out in a crash with a heavier vehicle.
Finish Your Dinner
In the UK, a new report says that by reducing food wastage, the country could prevent 18 million ton equivalents of CO2 emissions each year or nearly the amount emitted by one in the five cars.
David Erhlich at the Cleantech Group Ha href="http://media.cleantech.com/2823/food-waste-costs-billions-in-the-u-k">says:
According to the study, $2 billion worth of wasted food is still "in date." The group said it costs local authorities $2 billion to collect and dispose of all of the wasted food.
But there are answers, and WRAP said of the 6.7 million tonnes of food per year that's wasted, 4.1 million tonnes is avoidable.
UN: Renewable Investment Hits $100 Billion
In what is a financial milestone, the UN reports that global investment in renewable energy has exceeded $100 billion.
From Greentech Media:
"The finance community has been investing at levels that imply disruptive change is now inevitable in the energy sector," says Eric Usher, Head of the Energy Finance Unit at the UN. Usher said the UN's "report puts full stop to the idea of renewable energy being a fringe interest of environmentalists. It is now a mainstream commercial interest to investors and bankers alike."