Difference between revisions of "what needs to happen for us to accept nuclear power"

Latest revision as of 09:54, 13 September 2008

Recently it has become popular in the circles of ecologists to look at the idea of using nuclear power as an alternative source of fuel in our society. This has come in part as a response to the strong demand from the western society's desire to be eco-friendly without changing the lifestyle we have become so accustomed to. Without dwelling on the problems such a strategy provides us with, i wish to provide the movement with the constructive criticism of what social and technological advances need to take effect before the rational society accepts nuclear (or atomic) power. First a quick run through the definitions. Scientifically speaking nuclear power is power generated by fusing one or more nuclei together to form a nucleus of a different atom, the power comes from the mass differential as the total mass goes down through the process. The common definition, however, includes atomic power which unlike nuclear comes from splitting a single nucleus.

The level of technology today only allows the use of atomic power in the controlled fashion, nuclear power is only used for potential of the destructive force, for example in H-bombs. Main reason for that is the fact that the forces that are generated by the fusion (i.e. nuclear energy) are so great and produce such a run-away effect, that they would demolish any structure created to harness the power. So the question arises as to why can't we use the fission (i.e. atomic power) as the current technology allows. The answer can fill multi-volume book and still leave some areas unexplored, but for one as anarchists (or even remotely progressive individuals) we must acknowledge that while most of the energy consumption is done by the ruling an governing classes, it is the oppressed strata of our society which bare the cost of atomic power, which include inescapable radioactive waste, draconian social restrictions required to control that waste, and the exploitation necessary for the mining and production of the ore. And suggestions that the people who use the power also take responsibility for the effects only results in talks about vouchers and monetary reimbursement for people, whose lives have been ruined.

Now let's turn attention to true nuclear power. As already stated currently it is only used in the military arsenal, as the forces produced by it very fast become uncontrollable by the contemporary human technology. Even then the trigger mechanism for H-bomb has to use atomic power to generate the initial blast which creates the pressure and temperature needed for the beginning of the fusion reaction. It should also be noted that all the attempts at creating the "cold fusion" reaction have failed and we cannot stake our future on the possible impossibility of such a reaction. But even if it was possible, "cold fusion" talks about the fusion process which does not require the initial energy expenditure, not about the forces which will be produced, which will have to follow the theory of relativity and be enormous.

One approach is to use re regions of cosmos which are relatively close to Earth, but provide no direct connection to the global ecosystem (so the lower or even geosynchronous orbits are out of the question, due to the eventual decay of those orbits). It would theoretically be possible to set up a fission reactor on the lunar surface to generate the power there without the great deal of the problems encountered on Earth. It might even be possible to find the way to channel the otherwise destructive force of the fusion, as the entire lunar surface is open for potential use. While ignoring the political implications of using the cosmos by today's human population (social revolution is in order anyhow), it must be noted that even such an approach leads to numerous problems.

The transportation of the material required and the delivery of the energy back to Earth are the major problems that i see. Unless the energy generated off the Earth surface would be large enough to provide for the whole process of the interchange of matter and energy, and then leave enough for the constantly growing human population with the constantly growing demands.

So even with the nuclear power we are faced with the need for the end of consumerist social arrangements. In the unlikely case where such a social change can come in time before the oil simply runs out and together with the technological know-how to produce what i have talked about, it would be possible to make an energy investment to set up the process allowing for the large scale energy production for the humans without the social and environmental implications experienced today.

In the mean time we can use the same fusion reactions as have been used for milenia, solar power, which often manifests itself as wind power. Together with actually cutting down on the consumption i believe that it would provide human population with the energy humans actually need.