[Marxism] Nuclear Energy Causes Global Warming

DW dwaltersmia at gmail.com
Fri Jul 23 20:15:17 MDT 2010


I didn't raise nuclear energy once in my reply to the good doctor from
Oregon. The posting of such tripe, as well intentioned as the poster meant,
I'm sure, demeans the general standards of Marxmail when discussing issues
of science. This is why I only addressed the issue of energy as a 'heat
source' and other nonsense. Mark and others clearly agree.

But Louis raises an interesting question...meant as sort of a 'jab' at more
quite public position of advocating more, not less, nuclear energy,
specifically to address the climate crisis. The answer, however, may not be
the one expected by him since when I wrote "interesting", I quite meant
that.

To wit...first, the oil companies are perniciousness in their lust for oil
and the revenue it generates for the stock holder owners. Oil companies, as
well, like all fossil fuel enterprises, but most notably the "gas" part of
the oil business, are quite anti-nuclear as well. This is one reason you see
oil and gas companies touting things like solar and wind but never, ever, it
seem anyway, nuclear. Wonder why? But that too is a digression...here is my
main point and answer to Louis:

If BP *WAS* a nuclear reactor builder or operator, it would be quite a
different state of affairs in the Gulf. Namely, it is like to have never
happened in the first place. This has to do with the way components for
nuclear reactors are built and, as importantly, the way they've been run.
Unlike BP and the government 'regulator' the "Bureau of Mineral Management",
nuclear is held to a quite higher standard.

I wrote this the wake of the Gulf disaster for several other blogs and
mailing lists. It is short and I believe it will answer Louis' question:
We need to apply nuclear standards to oil drilling!June 28th, 2010

The Gulf is slowly in it's death throws. Maybe if "they" get it capped in
time, it will not be destroyed. Unlike many on the political Left, I don't
rush to argue that drilling needs to be stopped altogether. [I do support it
being stopped for the time being, however, or at least the exploratory side
of drilling as opposed to existing wells]. This helps no one. What does need
to happen, is that BP ought to be expropriated with no compensation. This is
not *only* the socialist inside me arguing this. It's what they deserve.

Secondly, we need to start taking back OUR resources from those that
ruthlessly, and carelessly, exploit them. How many people know that
much/lots/most of that oil they pump out is sold on the *world* market and
is not directed toward the U.S.? This gives a lie to the idea that
supporting off shore oil drilling "helps Americans". Hardly. An interesting
factoid me thinks...

But more to the point.

The political-economy of this disaster aside for a bit, part of this issue
is why they drill in deep water and under what kind of regulations. We know
now that the "Build oil refineries in Yellowstone Park party" Interior
Sect'y under Regean, James Watts, built this fake regulatory committee to
'oversee' the oil companies so they wouldn't be stymied by real regulations
like the NRC does with the nuclear industry.

So...what does this all mean? Well, for starters, we ought to have a serious
open ocean regulatory authority like the NRC has with nuclear: completely
financed by fees levied on oil extraction (a national oil excise tax to
start wouldn't be bad).

Secondly, they would have the right to stop, inspect, throw-in-jail, anyone
in the industry that could potentially cause harm to people first and then
the environment...exactly as the NRC does today. This means WELL PAID
inspectors who live under constant auditing provisions of their income. It
means a top-level Commission, not a small committee buried in the Interior
Dept.

Thirdly, all drilling equipment would have to be "N-stamped". The "N-Stamp"
on a piece of equipment means that it was produced at a facility designated
as modern enough, precise enough, with enough exacting standards to make
nuclear equipment for our nuclear power plants. There are only about 50
facilities in the US with "N-Stamp" approval. This stamp is issued by
the American
Society of Mechanical Engineers <http://www.asme.org/> is recognized not
only by the NRC but also nuclear regulatory agencies around the world.

The Nuclear Component Certification
Program<http://www.asme.org/Codes/CertifAccred/Certification/Nuclear_Accreditation.cfm>of
ASME is extremely tough and covers everything from component design to
component alloys to tolerances to installation. It is a *higher* standard
than that which NASA and the FAA applies to aerospace. This is the reason
there are no catastrophic *equipment* failures in the US and most of the
worlds nuclear industry that uses ASME certification.

If the blowout preventer had been built to NCCP/ASME specs, it simply would
not of failed. Yes it would cost BP and every oil drilling company
money...but so what?

NRC application to oil drilling *procedures* would insure the huge
miscommunication and BP's insistence on short cuts would of been...short
cutted right off the rig.

This would of included the right of "Right of Line Stop" by *anyone* on the
rig if they suspected anything was amiss. This means anyone could shut down
the process for an immediate investigation with no questions asked and
liabilities put on the company for any harassment of any employee engaging
in a line stop call.

D.



More information about the Marxism mailing list