Keith. I could not agree with you and most other posters on the dreadful environmental degradation and resource mismanagement evidenced everywhere in DR. No question our nation has had its share of blunders, oversights and idiotic mental lapses stemming from our notorious governments. Everyone says pretty much the same about how the "Dominican syndrome", that is; how laid back, irresponsible, careless, negligent, etc. we are thus creating and perpetuating a cycle of self-defeat..
I did not say that, and if you re-read not only my post in this thread, but my other posts in my DR1 posting history, I don't think you'll see me espousing that view.
Yes, I do talk about the decades-long record of giovernment-backed projects big and small, but that's because it's the track record, not some biased construct I have of all Dominicans and Dominican society.
And I am afraid we cannot just wave a magic wand and make this record change directions 180 degrees overnight. Wish we could, but not at all likely except with long, steady work at it...
All true, I'm sorry to say. All true.
Still....Is nuclear such an uncontrolled technology that we can't safely-with the help of some other nation- produce the necessary wattage so urgently needed for building a new prosperous country full smart and dedicated people?
Did I ever say that it was uncontrolled or uncontrollable?
Need I remind you that the two biggest nuclear mishaps in human history -- Three Mile Island and Chernobyl -- happened in the two nations with the most experience in managing nuclear power, the US and USSR? Getting the help of Americans or Canadians or Germans or Norwegians to manage it is no guarantee of safety. And at what
price would such help come? No one is going to offer to do it for free or cheaply. Are you factoring that into your projections of the cost of eventual power generated from a nuclear plant?
And by the way, the news reports and the government are not speaking of getting German or American or Swedish technology and help -- they're talking with Argentina.
Ok, let's then set aside for a moment talking as if the so-called "Northern" nuclear powers would be the suppliers of a turn-key nuclear power generation project for the DR. Take a look at the Latins instead. It's hard for me to find good stats on Argentine nuclear safety and environment performance, so you and I can only guess... But have you taken a look at the woes at the Angra facility in rival Brazil lately? And that involves newer generation German tech than does the Argentine system....
In spite of our shortcomings, do we abandon this option based on the assumed belief that we'll totally fail because we're total morons?
At what point, in this thread or in the past, did I ever say or imply that Dominicans are total morons? I didn't and I won't. That's a straw man, Juan. Puh-leeze.
That's also not the basis of my stated concerns about this option. Re-read what I said above and on the prior nuclear threads.
That we can not or will not understand the awesome responsibility of what it takes to run a nuclear facility?
Do we, Dominicans, lack the necessary ability to learn how to do something RIGHT for a change?
If I thought of Dominicans that way, I would never have started the
Green Team. Again, not at all what I was saying, and I think you know that.
We're all fully aware of the pros and cons of any technology. Every other option out there will either contribute to global warming (coal or gas) or simply won't be efficient enough or cost effective to fulfill our needs (solar, wind, tidal, etc.).
Yes, nuclear does help on the global climate change front (I prefer "climate change" rather than the more emotive "global warming," as I am not 100% sure how much warming we will see, but I am convinced that we will have major climate shifts, and may be seeing the initial phases of it now). But the DR's carbon footprint is not so globally significant as to make that a tipping point agrument for me. And you ignore the hughly significant nuclear waste issue, which even the US has yet to resolve but however will be around as a potential health and safety threat for thousands of years. Is that a legacy you want to wish on the country you love?
You may get someone to take the wastes, but who, and at what price? Again, not cheaply, and that will affect the pricing of the electricity generated.
And I'm not going to talk about possible low-level leaks, the cost of cooling water (and its impact on dwindling DR freshwater supplies) and other possible environmental ramifications. For the sake of discussion, for now we can pretend like best management can prevent any of those from being a problem and from being a significant cost factor, even though if you carefully check on the records of facilities in the US and Europe, you may conclude it's not wise to exclude such considerations...
You talk about nuclear fullfilling the DR's power needs. Will it, really? Without first taking care of the many transmission, distribution and payment problems others have raised here? I doubt that. A long list of experts have said that the DR already has the power generation capacity it needs -- it's just a question of paying for it and keeping it running properly and cutting the technical transimission losses. All of them long-term issues, decades long...
And what happens the first time the plant needs to close down for maintenance, or to resolve a safety or emissions problem?
Likewise, will the cost, at the end of the day, actually be lower? How sure are you of that? Careful! When it's being promoted, nuclear power is always presented as very cheap. But once installed and operational, and all cost factors fully accounted for, it never looks close to the original cost/price projections.
And would the DR merely be exchanging one kind of energy vulnerability (imported oil) for another, one more tightly controlled and often even more politicized (imported processed uranium)?
What would be the loan burden on the DR of such a project? For the money spent, you probably could increase consumer/user/generator efficiency, improve collection systems, set up alternative energy systems and maybe even -- dare I say it? -- find the waste-to-energy system that actually makes sense economically and environmentally for the DR, and still have funds left over. Or perhaps even better, take the whole pot and actually invest in health and education for once so we can have that future for the DR both you and I dream of and work toward....
The more I think of nuclear, the more sense it makes for today's DR, it's ugly side notwithstanding.
Sorry Keith, but that's how I see it.
No prob. We're all entitled to our opinions, and hopes and dreams and to voice them. I think I understand and certainly respect you Juan and your point-of-view. I just can't agree. But that doesn't mean we can't remain friends (BTW, when are we getting together again for a beer?
).
I still think nuclear is
not a compelling option for the DR, whether we're talking economics, environmental protection, energy generation profile or health and safety.
You've ignored or avoided or missed all the other points raised in this thread. For example, where in the world would you locate such a facility that it would have the water supplies it needs, be off the DR's fault lines and away from major hurricane alleys, be kept well secured, be on good road trunk lines and yet be far enough removed from tourism poles and population centers as to minimize safety issues and enable proper evacuation should the need arise?
Now Juan, I don't raise this issue because I think Dominicans are stupid or sloppy etc etc. I raise them out of necessary prudence. These are the very questions that US nuclear regulatory officials require power companies to contemplate and answer and plan for adequately before they are allowed to build a facility near you or me. Would you advocate throwing caution to the wind in installing a nuclear facility in your home country? Do Dominicans deserve less caution?
What about the terrorism issue, a real concern in this day and age. No, I'm not talking about terrorists blowing up the plant or holding it hostage. I'm talking diversion of fuel to be used to make a bomb, conventional nuclear or "dirty," take your pick. Can you say with full convidence that diversion is a non-issue in the Dominican context? I can't. I have seen too much of it in other areas in the DR in the 20 years I have known it to ignore this issue.
Just for the record, no matter what people here on DR1 may think to the contrary, I am not a knee-jerk opponent of nuclear power. I have lived within 50 miles of several plants in the US, I acknowledge its possible contribution to fighting global climate change, and if the waste problem can be properly resolved and health, safety and environment management kept in line with best practice, then I can live with it.
But I don't see that in the cards for the DR for quite a bit yet, and I don't think the DR can afford to wait for that day. The DR's policymakers need to focus more on the nearer-term, less expensive and more practical options and thorny energy management issues they have so far been dodging.
It's going to take a large dose of political will and leadership, not the sexy high-tech "fixes" that in reality are not fixes at all.
Respectfully,
Keith