Ambient office = 76 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 84 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 87 nanosieverts per hour

Red bell pepper from Central Market = 87 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 119 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 109 nanosieverts per hour

     There is a major worldwide debate about nuclear power that has important implications for its use. On one side of the debate, some analysts believe that nuclear power should be considered to be “green energy” because operation of a nuclear power plant produces very little carbon dioxide. On the other side to the debate, analysts say that the construction, fueling and waste handling with respect to nuclear power do produce a significant amount of carbon dioxide. Over the life of a nuclear power reactor, it will produce more carbon dioxide than wind, solar, geothermal and hydro power sources.
      Chang Tzi-chin is the Minister of the Taiwan Environmental Protection Administration (EPA). During a legislative session in Taipei on Thursday, he said that nuclear power cannot be considered to be green energy. That means that carbon reduction still requires renewable energy, energy efficiency, or carbon capture and storage technology.
      He considers this to be the mainstream view around the world. Environmental, social and governance investments (ESG) prohibit investing in nuclear power plant projects. MSCI is the most reputable aggregator of investment indices. It generates ESG lists by first excluding companies in the nuclear power, arms, gambling and pornography industries. Many funds that consult the MSCI ESG indices do not buy stocks or bonds of companies involved in those industries. After disregarding any of the prohibited companies, it looks at how a company’s performance indicators meet sustainability requirements. Most power plants in other countries are privately owned but many are publicly traded. MSCI-listed ESG funds ignore companies that generate revenue from nuclear power.
      For the past few years, the European Union (EU) has been publicizing it Green Deal. This is a transformation of the EU energy sector. It has adopted the EU energy classification system. This is a transparency tool that lists economic activities that meet sustainability standards. Companies that meet the standards are allowed to issue green bonds. These bonds have lower borrowing costs and fewer administrative procedures. Any fund that claims to be ESG must reveal how sustainable the companies in their portfolios really are. The EU classification system excludes nuclear power generation. Nuclear power can’t be used to account for carbon reduction efficiency.
     The EU position is that carbon reduction cannot be achieved to the detriment of the other environmental objectives. These include eliminating radioactive waste or protecting biodiversity. They believe that carbon reduction must “do no significant harm” to the environment. With respect to nuclear power, it is considered to be a major hazard in Taiwan, which is a densely populated country located in an earthquake zone.
      Another example of this concern is the proposed third liquified natural gas (LNG) terminal off the coast of Datan Borough in Taoyuan’s Guanyin District. The infrastructure for the LNG terminal has been moved farther out to sea away from the coastline and the shipping lane will not be dredged which will minimize damage to an algal reef. Even if the terminal is part of the fight against air pollution, it must comply with the principle of not causing any harm to other aspects of the environment.
     There are referendums being held next month in Taiwan that have either distorted the issue of nuclear power or have become highly politicized. Perhaps the logic that supports today’s ESG trend in global finance can assist the public to better comprehend the issue and make more informed decisions.

Ambient office = 76 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 84 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 87 nanosieverts per hour

English cucumber from Central Market = 87 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 119 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 109 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient office = 76 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 84 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 87 nanosieverts per hour

Blueberry from Central Market = 87 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 119 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 109 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient office = 76 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 84 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 87 nanosieverts per hour

Tomato from Central Market = 87 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 119 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 109 nanosieverts per hour

Dover sole – Caught in USA = 106 nanosieverts per hour

Part 3 of 3 Parts (Please read Parts 1 and 2 first)
Exotic metals
     Nuclear containment vessels for nuclear fission reactors are made of a variety of exotic rare metals that control and contain the nuclear fission reaction. Hafnium acts as a neutron absorber, beryllium acts as a neutron reflector, zirconium is used as cladding for the fuel rods and niobium alloys with steel to protect it from forty to sixty year of neutron embrittlement. Mining and refining these metals raise concerns about cost, sustainability and environmental impact. In addition, there are many industrial processes that compete for these metals. Hafnium is used in microchips and beryllium is also needed by the semiconductor industry. If a nuclear reactor is being constructed every day somewhere in the world, the global supply of these exotic metals needed to build containment vessels would quickly be depleted and there would be a mineral resource crisis. This is a new argument that Abbott raises. It places resource limits on all future-generation nuclear reactors.
     As Abbott mentions, many of these same problems would plague fusion reactors in addition to fission reactors even though commercial nuclear fusion power is still decades in the future.
      Of course, there are not that many nuclear power advocates who are calling for a nuclear utopia in which nuclear fission power supplies all the world’s energy needed. However, many nuclear advocates do suggest that the world should try to produce one terawatt of world power from nuclear energy. This may be feasible in the short run. On the other hand, if Abbott’s numbers for fifteen terawatts are divided by fifteen, even one terawatt of nuclear power production is barely feasible. Based on these estimations, Abbott questions whether or not nuclear fission power generation can even be scaled up to one terawatt. He suggests that the same investment would be better spent on technologies that are fully scalable.
     Abbott said, “Due to the cost, complexity, resource requirements, and tremendous problems that hang over nuclear power, our investment dollars would be more wisely placed elsewhere. Every dollar that goes into nuclear power is dollar that has been diverted from assisting the rapid uptake of a safe and scalable solution such as solar thermal.”
     Solar thermal devices harness the energy of the Sun to produce heat that creates steam that turns generators to generate electricity. Solar thermal technology avoids many of the scalability problems that trouble the nuclear power industry. A solar thermal farm requires about the same amount of land area needed for an equivalent nuclear power plant infrastructure. However, unlike nuclear power, solar thermal farms can be sited in unused desert areas. It is also constructed from safer and more abundant materials. The most import thing about solar thermal farms is that they can be scaled to produce not just fifteen terawatts but hundreds of terawatts in that is ever needed.
     However, the biggests problem with solar thermal technology is cloudy days and nighttime. Abbott is planning to research a variety of storage solutions for this intermittency problem. This problem also plagues other renewable energy solutions such as wind power. During the transition period of the near future, Abbott suggests that solar thermal farms and natural gas is the path toward building a practical future energy infrastructure.