Anyone remembers the report on Malaysia’s
plan for nuclear power plants in the ST recently? It seems that among the
gungho Asean countries, those thinking too big with their swollen heads and
those who think they need to keep growing their populations to achieve economic
growth at all cost, there is no other option than nuclear. Oil is going too be
too expensive in times to come and the growing demand for more energy with
bigger population and bigger appetite means nuclear and nothing else.
What is so beautiful about the Malaysian nuclear plan is the
location of their nuclear power plants, one near Penang
and one near Sinkieland. Obviously these have nothing to do with the
concentration of Chinese population in Penang, Sinkieland
and Southern Johore. The main reason for the choice of
locations is simply to get them as far away from KL as possible. A nuclear
mishap is going to neutralise a sizable area for a long time as can be seen in Fukushima
, Chernobyl and Three
Mile Island in the US.
And the heroes who are brave enough to resettle in the radioactive zone must be
praying to have godzilla or ultraman as their offsprings.
Sinkieland is equally deadset on the nuclear option I think.
What to do when population growth is a must or cannot be slowed down without
affecting economic growth? They must be planning for 10m or 20m population in
the future and are seriously investing in research and development of nuclear
plants here. And the snake oil sellers would never tell you the whole truth
about the risk involved. Even a 0.0001% risk is too high a risk in the context
of Sinkieland. We can never think of locating our nuclear plants in KL or Penang
for sure. So how far and how safe would it be in Tuas, Changi or Tekong?
9 comments:
if usa's n japan's nuclear stations can become koyak, then malaysia's nuclear station can become koyak in no time. no need to wait till 2050. i think within my lifetime. n i'm older than redbean.
Do you trust these clueless people to operate a nuclear plant when they can't even operate an MRT train in a small island?
And yes.
The assholes definitely want a nuclear plant.
The problem with these assholes is that once they have crafted a 50 year plan for themselves and Singapore,
they are unable to change course even if their lives depended on it.
The only way to save ourselves is to vote opposition before they start building nuclear plant.
The best way to solve Asean energy problem and achieve zero fossil fuel is to build a HVDC line from Kalimantan to mainland Asia. Then we can tap Kalimantan hydro, the most untapped and abundent resource in SE Asia.
I am written about this topic in my blog. I calculated base on several source that Kalimantan hydro potential is about 25GW.
Its almost enough to supply entire ASEAN today. Together with Myammar Hydro (2nd in SE Asia), we could do away with Oil, with car electrification. And SG peak demand is 0.6GW.
Sorry links above don work. Click below.
http://veritas-lux.blogspot.sg/2012/01/singapores-opaque-power-generation.html
http://veritas-lux.blogspot.sg/2012/01/buying-power-from-malaysia.html
America's Republican Party reminds me a lot of our Pro Alien Party.
Both are parties of rich people.
Both have ideologies bordering on the lunatic fringes.
For a taste of our own GE 2016;
Here's the Republican Party Convention 2012 through the eyes of a comedian: The Colbert Report
http://www.colbertnation.com/full-episodes/fri-august-31-2012-james-carville
Malaysia goes nuclear?
This is a comedy waiting to happen. I hope they go ahead with it.
Think of the genetic benefits:
UMmmmm-No! women can have their pukis bombarded with radiation, and perhaps then produce smarter babies, thus securing Malaysia's brain trust for the future.
Got Boleh attitude?
@anon 1026:
Although US Republicans and S'pore's PAP may have similar traits, US Republicans are different. They are nearly ALL religious i.e. they, as adults who make decisions for the cuntree, believe in an Imaginary Friend who can do magic with his imaginary powers and lives in an imaginary place.
These people are therefore more apt to have imaginary intelligence.
Singapore's PAP is far more simple: They have imaginary authority and stay in power through imaginary elections in an imaginary democracy.
Got Harry Potter?
Who says the MIWs are not religious people?
Have you ever asked a Millionaire Minister to spend some money on social services?
PAP Jokes
----------
Q: How can you tell when an MIW is really dead?
A: He lets go of his wallet.
Some technical inputs. 99% of nuclear reactors today are either light water, CANDU, graphite moderated sort. There are not inherently safe.
PAP is probably looking for pebble bed reactor, the new experimental reactor that is current on commercial pilot in China (I has run for years in lab). I am confident about the inherent safety of pebble bed reactor. Even if you cut up the reactor, there probably have little radiation as it is contained in Graphite pebbles. (Fukushima wont occur. Reactor melt down no problem)
I do not like Pebble Bed design, not because it is unsafe. The reason is engineers like to optimize efficiencies.
Today current batch of reactor burn 3% of unranium. Pebble bed could probably burn 4-5%.
In this area, China and Russia are leading as well. It is developing Fast Breedor Reactor. It could theoretically burn 80% of Uranium. Russia BN800 shows that such reactor is commercial feasible. But this is the most dangerous reactor. I believe China can eventually reduce the risk.
And better, China is developing LFTR, Liquid Flouride Thorium Reactor which is not only safe but also efficient.
And what is USA doing all these while? Why is she not doing anything, even if she has the best scientist and engineers in the whole world. The reason of USA lagging is capitalism. The elites hates public projects, because it will stop them from getting rich. In USA, the elite allow bridges and infrastructure to rot and vote down any attempts of building. In their concept, all infrastructure must be build by their own companies and a toll must be charged.
Capitalism has bring the downfall of once mighty USA. Most future energy development were either killed or scaled down to oblivion in 1980s onwards.
Post a Comment