[wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate change

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

[wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate change

Post by Thanas »

Der Spiegel
Copenhagen Climate Cables
The US and China Joined Forces Against Europe


Last year's climate summit in Copenhagen was a political disaster. Leaked US diplomatic cables now show why the summit failed so spectacularly. The dispatches reveal that the US and China, the world's top two polluters, joined forces to stymie every attempt by European nations to reach agreement.

In May 2009 the Chinese leaders received a very welcome guest. John Kerry, the powerful chairman of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, met with Deputy Prime Minister Li Keqiang in Beijing. Kerry told his hosts that Washington could understand "China's resistance to accepting mandatory targets at the United Nations Climate Conference, which will take place in Copenhagen."

According to a cable from the US embassy in the Chinese capital, Kerry outlined "a new basis for 'major cooperation' between the United States and China on climate change."

At that time, many Europeans were hoping the delegates at the Copenhagen summit would agree climate-change measures that could save the planet from the cumulative effects of global warming. But that dream died pitifully in mid-December 2009, and the world leaders went their separate ways again without any concrete achievements. Confidential US diplomatic cables published by WikiLeaks now show just how closely the world's biggest polluters -- the United States and China -- colluded in the months leading up to the conference. And they give weight to those who have long suspected that the two countries secretly formed an alliance.

The cooperation began under the last US president, George W. Bush. In 2007 Bush's senior climate negotiator, Harlan Watson, organized a 10-year framework agreement with China on cooperation on energy and the environment. The two countries also agreed to hold a "Strategic and Economic Dialogue" -- backroom talks that neither the Americans nor the Chinese were willing to admit to at first.


China and the US Continue Polluting

Bush's successor, President Barack Obama, and the new Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton, continued this dialogue. During Clinton's inaugural visit to China, Beijing agreed to the formation of a "new partnership on energy and climate change," according to a US embassy dispatch dated May 15, 2009. Here too the aim was to ensure the outcome of the climate talks in Copenhagen would be favorable to Washington and Beijing.


But was it really favorable for the two countries? Both had previously managed to avoid committing to serious reductions in greenhouse-gas emissions. The Kyoto Protocol, signed at the climate summit that preceded Copenhagen in 1997, distinguished between industrialized nations, which were to reduce their emissions, and developing countries -- including economic powerhouse China -- which could basically continue releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere without restrictions. "Joint, but differentiated responsibility," was the principle upon which the Kyoto Protocol was based.

Although the US signed the protocol, it never ratified it. As such, the Chinese and the Americans can continue polluting at will. Meanwhile European nations will have to cut their energy consumption. They, therefore, fought for a new agreement in Copenhagen, one that would tie the United States, China and newly-industrialized nations India and Brazil to specific emission-reduction targets.

'Working Hard at Cutting Emissions'

During his visit to China, Senator Kerry, a former presidential candidate for the Democrats, told the Beijing leadership that the Europeans were determined to push through their goal for agreement on concrete cuts in emissions for the US and other industrialized countries. However, nothing would change for China. Together with the other "developing countries" the Chinese would merely have to say they would "work hard to reduce emissions."


A "scenesetter" drawn up for Kerry by American embassy officials estimated China would invest "$175 billion in environmental protection in the next five years" and that US companies were well positioned to benefit handsomely from this investment. "Westinghouse, for example, estimates that several thousand US-based jobs are retained every time China orders another nuclear reactor from them," the paper claimed.

A note from the US ambassador in Canberra, Australia, showed that the Europeans were well aware of the close relationship between China and the United States.

The memo summarizes a conversation between an embassy employee and an Australian climate negotiator, who reported on a preparatory meeting for the G-8 summit in L'Aquila, Italy. He said the other delegations "including the EU" had noticed the "visibly more comfortable" interaction between the US and China. The Australian said the Europeans' observations led them to doubt whether they could get their climate-change measures approved.

The Germans Complained

In September 2009 the US State Department ordered its European embassies to launch a kind of PR campaign. This was to be targeted primarily at governments, but also to "the press, NGOs … and other opinion leaders." The diplomats were to explain that "Obama is taking the United States in a new direction in the fight against climate change" and that he wanted a decisive 17-percent cut in greenhouse gases.

However, the Europeans suspected that Washington was playing with numbers by using the year 2005 as their baseline rather than 1990, which European figures were based on. Nevertheless embassy staff tried to convince the skeptical Europeans that the US government's targets "are consistent with keeping the increase in global temperature to 2 degrees Celsius."

When the leaders and representatives of 192 countries gathered in Copenhagen last December, everyone was talking about an agreement. However, at the decisive moment Europe's politicians were forced to stand by helplessly while China, India, South Africa and Brazil met in a hotel room and took matters into their own hands. They took the draft Copenhagen agreement and struck off all binding obligations. Later on the plotters were joined by Barack Obama. The outcome of this paring-down is now known as the "Copenhagen Accord." In international negotiations, this vague draft resolution now stands alongside the specific plan demanded by the Europeans.


A month after the Copenhagen debacle, German negotiators complained bitterly to the Americans. They said the "Europeans were unhappy that they had not been included in important negotiations between the US and China."

US Dangled Carrot in Front of Developing Nations

In contrast to the apathy that befell the Europeans after the summit, US climate negotiator, Jonathan Pershing, went to great lengths to shore up his country's advantage. He and his emissaries offered carrots in the form of development aid to poorer nations in particular to get them to agree to the "Copenhagen Accord."

For example, Pershing more-or-less forced an ambassador from the Maldives to take millions of dollars in assistance. He said the ambassador should simply state exactly how much his Indian Ocean archipelago needed. This, Pershing claimed, would increase "the likelihood" that Congress would quickly approve the funds. "Other nations would then come to realize that there are advantages to be gained by compliance," a US memo noted.


To help convey the message to developing nations, the Maldivian ambassador suggested President Obama come to the islands to give a speech on the issue. After all, the ambassador reasoned, the Maldives would form "a dramatic backdrop" against which to talk about environmental challenges.
Bolding mine.


So there you have it - China and the USA worked together to sabotage any serious effort to fight climate change, with complete help and support from Obama. In doing this they worked hard to outmaneuver the Europeans, who were the only ones fighting for real change.

My disgust for Obama has reached new levels.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs
Zed
Padawan Learner
Posts: 487
Joined: 2010-05-19 08:56pm

Re: [wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate cha

Post by Zed »

And the Americans claim that current European leaders don't show any leadership qualities. I would think that long term planning is a significant quality leaders should have, and which the Americans are clearly lacking.

Edit: it should be noted that the Chinese now seem to be in favor of a binding agreement: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE68N19220100924
(Reuters) - China wants the world to seal a binding climate change treaty by late 2011, a Chinese negotiator said in a newspaper on Friday, blaming U.S. politics for impeding talks and making a deal on global warming impossible this year.

Li Gao, a senior Chinese negotiator on climate change, said his government would remain unyielding on issues of "principle" in the talks aimed at forging a successor to the Kyoto Protocol. The first period of that key treaty on fighting global warming expires at the end of 2012.

Li also vowed to keep pressing rich countries to promise deeper cuts to carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from human activity that are stoking global warming, said the China Economic Times, which reported his comments.

Many governments and experts have already dismissed hopes for a full climate change treaty at the next major negotiation meeting, to be held in Cancun, Mexico at the end of this year.

Li underscored that gloom, but also said his government hoped Cancun could be a stepping stone to negotiations next year that will culminate in a meeting in South Africa in November.

"China hopes that based on the outcomes from Cancun, we'll be able to settle on a legally binding document at the meeting in South Africa," Li said, according to the Chinese-language newspaper.

"After the South Africa meeting, we'll move to concrete implementation."

Li oversees the international climate change negotiations office at China's National Development and Reform Commission, a sprawling agency that steers economy policy.

The deadline for a new binding global pact was originally set for late 2009, but a final round of negotiations in Copenhagen ended in acrimonious failure, with some Western politicians saying China was not willing to compromise.

China will be a crucial player in the follow-up talks.

With its 1.3 billion people, it is the world's biggest emitter of greenhouse gases from human activity, but is also a developing country with average emissions per capita well below those of wealthy economies.

The United States, European Union and other governments want China to take on stronger commitments to control and eventually cut its emissions.

But Li said it was U.S. political uncertainty that had stymied any hope of the Cancun meeting agreeing on a treaty to succeed Kyoto.

"The biggest obstacle comes from the United States," he said. "Without any (climate change) legislation, it can't possibly join in a legally binding international document."

The U.S. Senate has dropped efforts to put emissions curbs in an energy bill now focused on reforming offshore drilling.

Negotiators from nearly 200 nations are haggling over a complex draft accord on climate change, and a further round of talks at the northern Chinese port of Tianjin opens on October 4.

Li said Beijing would keep pressing for certain principles, including that developing countries like China should not shoulder the same absolute caps on emissions that rich countries must take on.

(Reporting by Chris Buckley; Editing by Jonathon Burch)
User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: [wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate cha

Post by Thanas »

The americans were also in favor of a lot of things, doesn't mean they will keep their word in the negotiations.

And actually, the USA does follow its interests. It simply reckons that it will not be hit so hard that it is worth limiting their industry now. Which is a cynical point to take especially given Obama's rhetoric, but it is a point of view nonetheless.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs
User avatar
wautd
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7595
Joined: 2004-02-11 10:11am
Location: Intensive care

Re: [wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate cha

Post by wautd »

At least China is researching and investing a lot in infrastructure for green energy. It's inexplicable that the US isn't doing such things, as it's a pretty open market with a huge job potential and know-how. I guess short term goals (politicians pockets) are more important than long term goals. I can only assume Big Oil is lobbying too much (in any other country it would be called corruption but what the hey). The US is truly an empire in decline, and very rapidly at that.
User avatar
mr friendly guy
The Doctor
Posts: 11235
Joined: 2004-12-12 10:55pm
Location: In a 1960s police telephone box somewhere in Australia

Re: [wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate cha

Post by mr friendly guy »

The US as of 2009 is still number one for wind power (although the EU as a whole easily outdo the US). China should get into at least number two and maybe edge out the US as number one wind producer at the end of this year. I think it will take a few years for China to surpass the US in solar energy produced. As one US analyst says, we are still number two.

The question is in the long term what will happen. Some of China's plans will take a bit longer to come into effect, eg nuclear. I am unsure what the US plans are so I can't comment.
Never apologise for being a geek, because they won't apologise to you for being an arsehole. John Barrowman - 22 June 2014 Perth Supernova.

Countries I have been to - 14.
Australia, Canada, China, Colombia, Denmark, Ecuador, Finland, Germany, Malaysia, Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, Sweden, USA.
Always on the lookout for more nice places to visit.
User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: [wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate cha

Post by Thanas »

I am not sure if China is that committed to stop climate change, given how they behave in the diplomatic cables they seem to be more interested in keeping their options open, but not that interested to stop climate change per se. The amount of wind power per capita is laughable both for China and the USA.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs
User avatar
mr friendly guy
The Doctor
Posts: 11235
Joined: 2004-12-12 10:55pm
Location: In a 1960s police telephone box somewhere in Australia

Re: [wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate cha

Post by mr friendly guy »

I think with things like businesses, people won't fight climate change for altruistic reasons alone. There has to be something else. In this case money to be made from green technology (including ordering power companies to favour wind producers over coal), or because coal can't supply all your energy needs (hence carbon neutral nuclear power), and at least Chinese leaders see those steps as necessary. The fact that it also helps fight climate change is a bonus really.

At the end of the day the final action is what matters most, rather than what their true motivations are, or how highly ranked is one motivation vs another. If US leaders (or Chinese leaders for that matter) fight climate change because a magic man living in the sky told them to, I would think they are crazy but thank them for their contribution to fighting climate change all the same.

Now its true that wind power per capita is low for say China, but their total energy usage per capita is also low. Now if they increased their energy usage without increasing the contribution from carbon neutral sources I would get worried.
Never apologise for being a geek, because they won't apologise to you for being an arsehole. John Barrowman - 22 June 2014 Perth Supernova.

Countries I have been to - 14.
Australia, Canada, China, Colombia, Denmark, Ecuador, Finland, Germany, Malaysia, Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, Sweden, USA.
Always on the lookout for more nice places to visit.
User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: [wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate cha

Post by Thanas »

mr friendly guy wrote:Now its true that wind power per capita is low for say China, but their total energy usage per capita is also low. Now if they increased their energy usage without increasing the contribution from carbon neutral sources I would get worried.
Aren't they opening new coal plants? Point is I rather see China as a nation that is unwilling to protect the environment per se, but rather seeks to get as many energy sources as possible.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs
User avatar
LaCroix
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5196
Joined: 2004-12-21 12:14pm
Location: Sopron District, Hungary, Europe, Terra

Re: [wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate cha

Post by LaCroix »

USA windpower 2009: 35GW (2%)
Germany windpower 2009 25GW (6.6%)
China 25GW

China certainly will improve that, because they can - surveys imply that China has the possibility to be completely wind-powered by 2030. They even use small facilities in cities, which as concept is a good idea - create where needed. Also, they currently try to patch their net to transport the power from their megafarms.

I think they realized that with their enormous oil usage, they become too dependent on other countries, and the party didn't like that fact.
A minute's thought suggests that the very idea of this is stupid. A more detailed examination raises the possibility that it might be an answer to the question "how could the Germans win the war after the US gets involved?" - Captain Seafort, in a thread proposing a 1942 'D-Day' in Quiberon Bay

I do archery skeet. With a Trebuchet.
User avatar
Kane Starkiller
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1510
Joined: 2005-01-21 01:39pm

Re: [wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate cha

Post by Kane Starkiller »

US also increased its wind capacity greatly from 11GW in 2006 to 35GW in 2009. Also between 2008 and 2009 US increased its capacity by 10GW. If they continue adding capacity at this rate US capacity will be 135GW by 2020 or 570GW assuming they keep a growth percentage equal to that between 2006-2009.
But if the forces of evil should rise again, to cast a shadow on the heart of the city.
Call me. -Batman
User avatar
Darksider
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5271
Joined: 2002-12-13 02:56pm
Location: America's decaying industrial armpit.

Re: [wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate cha

Post by Darksider »

Can the U.S. keep that growth percentage though?

There are hard physical limits to wind power that might prevent it. You can build a nuclear power plant anywhere, but not every location is suitable for a wind farm.
And this is why you don't watch anything produced by Ronald D. Moore after he had his brain surgically removed and replaced with a bag of elephant semen.-Gramzamber, on why Caprica sucks
User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: [wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate cha

Post by Thanas »

Darksider wrote:You can build a nuclear power plant anywhere
You really can't.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs
User avatar
LaCroix
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5196
Joined: 2004-12-21 12:14pm
Location: Sopron District, Hungary, Europe, Terra

Re: [wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate cha

Post by LaCroix »

Darksider wrote:Can the U.S. keep that growth percentage though?

There are hard physical limits to wind power that might prevent it. You can build a nuclear power plant anywhere, but not every location is suitable for a wind farm.
All you need is a plot of land with somewhat steady wind for a wind farm, or a coast for off-shore wind farms. Both are abundant in the US, but political will isn't.

For a nuclear plant, you need a big stream of water nearby to feed the cooling tower, no hurricanes/tornadoes and no earthquakes. Oh, and no preferably no population centers too close nearby. That makes the list of places shrink quite a lot in the US...
A minute's thought suggests that the very idea of this is stupid. A more detailed examination raises the possibility that it might be an answer to the question "how could the Germans win the war after the US gets involved?" - Captain Seafort, in a thread proposing a 1942 'D-Day' in Quiberon Bay

I do archery skeet. With a Trebuchet.
User avatar
General Zod
Never Shuts Up
Posts: 29211
Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
Location: The Clearance Rack
Contact:

Re: [wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate cha

Post by General Zod »

LaCroix wrote: For a nuclear plant, you need a big stream of water nearby to feed the cooling tower, no hurricanes/tornadoes and no earthquakes. Oh, and no preferably no population centers too close nearby. That makes the list of places shrink quite a lot in the US...
Your information is out of date. At this point the biggest hurdle is overcoming red tape.
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
User avatar
Ryan Thunder
Village Idiot
Posts: 4139
Joined: 2007-09-16 07:53pm
Location: Canada

Re: [wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate cha

Post by Ryan Thunder »

They're perfectly safe if you use a modern reactor, so there's no issue with putting them near population centres.
SDN Worlds 5: Sanctum
User avatar
LaCroix
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5196
Joined: 2004-12-21 12:14pm
Location: Sopron District, Hungary, Europe, Terra

Re: [wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate cha

Post by LaCroix »

General Zod wrote:
LaCroix wrote: For a nuclear plant, you need a big stream of water nearby to feed the cooling tower, no hurricanes/tornadoes and no earthquakes. Oh, and no preferably no population centers too close nearby. That makes the list of places shrink quite a lot in the US...
Your information is out of date. At this point the biggest hurdle is overcoming red tape.
Since NONE of them have actually been deployed, and initial delivery is slated to occur in 2013 (but no references to customers, at all on their website) I wouldn't hold my breath of nuclear reactors being built in small scale anywhere...
A minute's thought suggests that the very idea of this is stupid. A more detailed examination raises the possibility that it might be an answer to the question "how could the Germans win the war after the US gets involved?" - Captain Seafort, in a thread proposing a 1942 'D-Day' in Quiberon Bay

I do archery skeet. With a Trebuchet.
User avatar
General Zod
Never Shuts Up
Posts: 29211
Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
Location: The Clearance Rack
Contact:

Re: [wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate cha

Post by General Zod »

LaCroix wrote:
General Zod wrote:
LaCroix wrote: For a nuclear plant, you need a big stream of water nearby to feed the cooling tower, no hurricanes/tornadoes and no earthquakes. Oh, and no preferably no population centers too close nearby. That makes the list of places shrink quite a lot in the US...
Your information is out of date. At this point the biggest hurdle is overcoming red tape.
Since NONE of them have actually been deployed, and initial delivery is slated to occur in 2013 (but no references to customers, at all on their website) I wouldn't hold my breath of nuclear reactors being built in small scale anywhere...
Read more carefully. In any case your information is outdated because none of your criteria are required for new plants, and it's not like you can build these things instantly.
The company plans to set up three factories to produce 4,000 plants between 2013 and 2023. 'We already have a pipeline for 100 reactors, and we are taking our time to tool up to mass-produce this reactor.'

The first confirmed order came from TES, a Czech infrastructure company specialising in water plants and power plants. 'They ordered six units and optioned a further 12. We are very sure of their capability to purchase,' said Deal. The first one, he said, would be installed in Romania. 'We now have a six-year waiting list. We are in talks with developers in the Cayman Islands, Panama and the Bahamas.'
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
User avatar
LaCroix
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5196
Joined: 2004-12-21 12:14pm
Location: Sopron District, Hungary, Europe, Terra

Re: [wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate cha

Post by LaCroix »

Ryan Thunder wrote:They're perfectly safe if you use a modern reactor, so there's no issue with putting them near population centres.
Except for the population rallying against the project, and the local politicians not wanting to be the one that allows it. Ask people how they would like living next to a reactor.

Just look at this map.
As far as I know (info from FEMA), only 3 million Americans live within 10 miles of an nuclear reactor, and this even though they are in the most populated areas. Seems they are making an effort to have them as far removed from cities as possible...
A minute's thought suggests that the very idea of this is stupid. A more detailed examination raises the possibility that it might be an answer to the question "how could the Germans win the war after the US gets involved?" - Captain Seafort, in a thread proposing a 1942 'D-Day' in Quiberon Bay

I do archery skeet. With a Trebuchet.
User avatar
Ryan Thunder
Village Idiot
Posts: 4139
Joined: 2007-09-16 07:53pm
Location: Canada

Re: [wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate cha

Post by Ryan Thunder »

EDIT: knee-jerk post, please disregard. -_-
Last edited by Ryan Thunder on 2010-12-09 12:40pm, edited 1 time in total.
SDN Worlds 5: Sanctum
User avatar
General Zod
Never Shuts Up
Posts: 29211
Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
Location: The Clearance Rack
Contact:

Re: [wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate cha

Post by General Zod »

LaCroix wrote: Except for the population rallying against the project, and the local politicians not wanting to be the one that allows it. Ask people how they would like living next to a reactor.

Just look at this map.
As far as I know (info from FEMA), only 3 million Americans live within 10 miles of an nuclear reactor, and this even though they are in the most populated areas. Seems they are making an effort to have them as far removed from cities as possible...
The fact that Americans are ignorant of nuclear safety is irrelevant to whether or not the designs are safe. You're at more risk from living next to a coal plant than a nuclear one. But your goalpost shifting is amusing.
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
User avatar
LaCroix
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5196
Joined: 2004-12-21 12:14pm
Location: Sopron District, Hungary, Europe, Terra

Re: [wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate cha

Post by LaCroix »

General Zod wrote: Read more carefully. In any case your information is outdated because none of your criteria are required for new plants, and it's not like you can build these things instantly.
The company plans to set up three factories to produce 4,000 plants between 2013 and 2023. 'We already have a pipeline for 100 reactors, and we are taking our time to tool up to mass-produce this reactor.'

The first confirmed order came from TES, a Czech infrastructure company specialising in water plants and power plants. 'They ordered six units and optioned a further 12. We are very sure of their capability to purchase,' said Deal. The first one, he said, would be installed in Romania. 'We now have a six-year waiting list. We are in talks with developers in the Cayman Islands, Panama and the Bahamas.'
I concede the issue about the criteria, but I still won't start cheering until they actually deliver those things.

The article about the orders is from 2008, and nothing is said about that on the TES homepage, and I really doubt that a wind and water power company will subcontract nuclear devices, but we'll see... So far, it's nothing but the company saying that they have customers and are talking to other interested parties, and are planning to .

Also, they say they are seeking approval next year, and the certification process will take 3-5 years. Then, they will have to build the plants to fabricate them, produce them, etc. First delivery in 2013 is a tight schedule.

Right now, the concept is ok, but the rest is nothing but hot air. I withhold my applause until it is deployed, but I don't think I can get behind the idea of a nuclear reactor in a small town, guarded by Joe Watchman.
A minute's thought suggests that the very idea of this is stupid. A more detailed examination raises the possibility that it might be an answer to the question "how could the Germans win the war after the US gets involved?" - Captain Seafort, in a thread proposing a 1942 'D-Day' in Quiberon Bay

I do archery skeet. With a Trebuchet.
HarrionGreyjoy
Youngling
Posts: 52
Joined: 2010-05-02 12:49am

Re: [wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate cha

Post by HarrionGreyjoy »

LaCroix wrote:
Ryan Thunder wrote:They're perfectly safe if you use a modern reactor, so there's no issue with putting them near population centres.
Except for the population rallying against the project, and the local politicians not wanting to be the one that allows it. Ask people how they would like living next to a reactor.

Just look at this map.
As far as I know (info from FEMA), only 3 million Americans live within 10 miles of an nuclear reactor, and this even though they are in the most populated areas. Seems they are making an effort to have them as far removed from cities as possible...
I actually live quite close to a singularly dinky one, but neither of the reactors Texas A&M maintains are for power generation, sadly.

(On a related note, pool reactors, while probably an inefficient use of water these days, look *really cool*. Which might be a handy boon to public relations, I suppose.)

...Evidently one of the recent research projects was seeing what happens when you expose fire ants to radioactivity. Haven't these guys ever played Fallout? What if we get giant mutant fire ants? :wtf:
User avatar
LaCroix
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5196
Joined: 2004-12-21 12:14pm
Location: Sopron District, Hungary, Europe, Terra

Re: [wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate cha

Post by LaCroix »

General Zod wrote:
LaCroix wrote: Except for the population rallying against the project, and the local politicians not wanting to be the one that allows it. Ask people how they would like living next to a reactor.

Just look at this map.
As far as I know (info from FEMA), only 3 million Americans live within 10 miles of an nuclear reactor, and this even though they are in the most populated areas. Seems they are making an effort to have them as far removed from cities as possible...
The fact that Americans are ignorant of nuclear safety is irrelevant to whether or not the designs are safe. You're at more risk from living next to a coal plant than a nuclear one. But your goalpost shifting is amusing.
No goalpost has been touched. I never said that you have to build them away from population centers for a health reason.

You know that they're safer, I know that they're safer, probably everybody knows it - but most people still don't want NEITHER next to their doorstep. Guess whom the politicians have to appease? The same thing applies worldwide. People in countries that don't oppose nuclear power on principle are usually ok with a nuclear plant, as long as it is built FAR away...
A minute's thought suggests that the very idea of this is stupid. A more detailed examination raises the possibility that it might be an answer to the question "how could the Germans win the war after the US gets involved?" - Captain Seafort, in a thread proposing a 1942 'D-Day' in Quiberon Bay

I do archery skeet. With a Trebuchet.
User avatar
General Zod
Never Shuts Up
Posts: 29211
Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
Location: The Clearance Rack
Contact:

Re: [wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate cha

Post by General Zod »

LaCroix wrote: I concede the issue about the criteria, but I still won't start cheering until they actually deliver those things.

The article about the orders is from 2008, and nothing is said about that on the TES homepage, and I really doubt that a wind and water power company will subcontract nuclear devices, but we'll see... So far, it's nothing but the company saying that they have customers and are talking to other interested parties, and are planning to .

Also, they say they are seeking approval next year, and the certification process will take 3-5 years. Then, they will have to build the plants to fabricate them, produce them, etc. First delivery in 2013 is a tight schedule.
So what? Nobody ever said getting nuclear plants approved was a fast process and I already said red tape was the biggest hurdle.
Right now, the concept is ok, but the rest is nothing but hot air. I withhold my applause until it is deployed, but I don't think I can get behind the idea of a nuclear reactor in a small town, guarded by Joe Watchman.
Why not? They're going to be buried underground and completely sealed.
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
User avatar
General Zod
Never Shuts Up
Posts: 29211
Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
Location: The Clearance Rack
Contact:

Re: [wikileaks] US and China allied to stop anti-climate cha

Post by General Zod »

LaCroix wrote: No goalpost has been touched. I never said that you have to build them away from population centers for a health reason.
I provided evidence that your criteria weren't needed. You complained about them not being available. I provided proof of orders. You complained about demonstrations. That's goalpost shifting if I ever saw it. Just suck it up and admit you're wrong.
You know that they're safer, I know that they're safer, probably everybody knows it - but most people still don't want NEITHER next to their doorstep. Guess whom the politicians have to appease? The same thing applies worldwide. People in countries that don't oppose nuclear power on principle are usually ok with a nuclear plant, as long as it is built FAR away...
Who cares? That's not what the discussion is about.
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
Post Reply