Green Nuclear Reactors

Nuclear energy has been (not entirely undeservedly) demonized almost since its inception. And how could it not? Reactors can experience catastrophic meltdowns. Nuclear waste has to be stored for thousands of years before it becomes safe. And, let's not forget, some of the byproducts of current nuclear reactors can be used to make nuclear bombs. Not the most desirable characteristics.

Why is this so? Because current nuclear technology, all over the world, is built around uranium. That's 100% of the world's reactors, regardless of whether they are Russian, French, Chinese, American, Canadian, or from elsewhere. And the reason for this is that this technology was pushed during the Cold War, to the detriment of other alternatives - plutonium for nuclear bombs was simply too strategic an asset at a time when the two superpowers were busy stockpiling their nuclear arsenals.

Enter the alternative: thorium. A group of enthusiastic scientists have been resuming research begun in the 50s and 60s. A very interesting article can be read on this month's Wired magazine. Here are some facts about this technology:

• It is safer than uranium (the radioactivity it gives off naturally is low enough that you could carry a lump in your pocket without any side effects).
• It is also cheaper, since it is much more abundant in nature than uranium.
• There are important deposits in many countries (the USA, Canada, Brazil, Australia, India, and Turkey, to name a few), so no single government can control it as a strategic resource.
  
• The amount of waste left behind is a tiny fraction of what a conventional reactor would generate.
• Said waste decays in a couple of hundred years, as opposed to a few thousand.
• It is virtually impossible for the byproducts of the reaction to be used in the manufacture nuclear bombs - by terrorists or anyone else.

Kirk Sorensen is the author of a blog about this new (or rediscovered) technology. It can be found here.

Research is being carried out into developing relatively small thorium reactors capable of generating between 10 and 100 megawatts of electricity (enough to power between 7,000 and 70,000 households in the US). This project, called SSTAR (for small, sealed, transportable, autonomous reactor) could well mean the technological leap that will make reactors cheap and safe enough to place them all over the world. More on the SSTAR project can be read here.


Could this be the breakthrough we have been waiting for? Only time will tell. This technology was sidelined in the 50s and 60s in favour of the one we use now because of the interest the nuclear powers had in obtaining plutonium for their arsenals. The world has changed - perhaps thorium reactors will help usher in a new era for nuclear energy. Again, only time will tell.

China's High Speed Train

A few days ago, on December 26th, the high-speed train line between the Chinese cities of Wuhan and Guangzhou was inaugurated. Here are some facts:

• The distance covered is 968 kilometres (602 miles). That's about 2.5 times the distance between London and Paris - or slightly less than twice the distance between LA and San Francisco.
• The average speed is 313 km/h (194 mph) - the fastest train until now, France's TGV, runs at an average speed of 279 km/h (173 mph).
• The time for the full journey is 3 hours, 8 minutes. The same trip, by airplane, takes 1 hour and 30 minutes - but with check-in, security screening, boarding time, and trip to and from the airport considered, the time for the full journey is closer to 4 hours.
• The ticket for the full journey costs between $70 and $115 US dollars. By comparison, a flight is $300 dollars - without accounting for the trip from the city centre to the airport.
• And last, but not least... the German-designed, Chinese-made trains are electric.

Rail transport is a great way to reduce a country's carbon footprint. More people and goods can be moved between places on a single train than on a convoy of trailers or an airplane, even the largest one, using less fuel. If the train is moved with electric power, this effect is magnified. Even more so if the electricity is generated by wind, solar, hydro, or nuclear means - all of these areas where China is investing heavily(PDF).

Electric vehicles powered by renewable sources. That's where we should be headed. That's what European countries are slowly aiming for. That's what many in the US wish, and it is only a matter of time before will meets desire (there are already plans for a high-speed rail link between LA and San Francisco). And let's not forget that less dependance on oil and gas will make all societies freer. Reducing the weight that fossil fuels have in current geopolitics will lead to loss of power for many a repressive and authoritarian regime (think Venezuela, Iran, or Saudi Arabia - states where a very small elite holds on to power thanks to revenues from the sale of oil and gas). And the environmental benefits are not to be ignored, either.

China is widely regarded as an environmental disaster in the making. And yet, they are the ones showing the rest of the world where should we be heading.

Many countries are happy to distance themselves from the evil things the Chinese government is known to do: human rights abuses, repression, even outright murder. I agree with that distancing, and encourage it (and am thankful for it). Now, let's just hope the West is wise enough to recognise not only the evils, but also the goods, and pursue the latter as much as we avoid the former.

Acapulco

I'm currently sitting on a terrace, overlooking the Bay of Acapulco. The sight is peaceful, and certainly impressive. The city of about a million inhabitants spreads around the bay, lighting the night in a subdued way, so that a few stars are actually visible, even within the city (this never happens in other cities). A cool, steady breeze can be felt blowing from the Pacific Ocean, making the otherwise stifling 32°C (90°F) heat almost imperceptible. That's quite a feat.

One could almost think that the city is asleep, just enjoying the peace and apparent quiet. But Acapulco is a city that lives at night almost as much as it lives during the day. Perhaps even more, by some measures. Night clubs and bars pepper the city, and restaurants open their doors almost throughout the night.

A couple of years ago I wrote an article for StrayCompass.com about this beautiful Mexican port. It can be found here. Now, the city has changed little in the past few years. In many ways, it could be said that it hasn't changed at all in the past 50 years or so. Many of the city's famous restaurants and clubs have been around for decades. That doesn't mean the place is stagnant - au contraire, there's always something new going on. Recently, the city's first Irish pub opened close to Baby'O, one of Acapulco's legendary clubs. A new development to the south boasts some of the finest restaurants in the city. But it is the old Acapulco, the one that has been around for decades and has apparently not changed, the one that is reflection of a bygone era and yet as present as today, that is the Acapulco of legend. This video by LonelyPlanet will give you a good idea of what I mean.



So, if you ever have the chance, go to the Hotel Mirador and watch the cliff-divers at La Quebrada; visit the Frontón, the abandoned Jai-Alai court; go to Barra Vieja for some pescado a la talla with Beto Godoy; or simply walk around town. It is a somewhat unusual mixture of old and new, worldly and yet fully Mexican.

And if you happen to be in town on a Thursday, by all means try the pozole.

Hugo Chávez, enemy of climate

So, COP-15 reached its end. The two year process that began at Bali has been now extended a further year, and it will hopefully be in Mexico where the nations look to negotiate what they couldn't in Denmark. Both working groups (the one looking to extend Kyoto and the one looking for a new binding agreement that included the United States) essentially failed to reach an agreement.

It was a close to last minute intervention by a group of leaders from the world's major emission producers what prevented the COP-15 from becoming a sounding failure. The surfacing of a text which was agreed upon by the US, China, India, South Africa, Brazil, and twenty other nations allowed the conference organizers to bring it to a close with a qualified agreement, which was recognized by COP-15 leaders, but not adopted.

The following is the most important part:

Since the COP operates under a mechanism of consensus, any opposition to a proposal, even if by a single member, means that passage is impossible. So, who was in opposition? Bolivia, Cuba, Nicaragua, Sudan, and Venezuela. It is a well known fact that the latter exercises an undue amount of influence over the governments of Bolivia and Nicaragua, and, absent Fidel, over that of Cuba. So, Hugo managed to throw a spanner in the gears of something that is necessary for humankind. Not just for Venezuela or whatever puny characters are under its sphere of influence, but of every single person - every single living being! - on our planet.

To borrow a phrase from a friend of mine, during the last few years it's become increasingly clear that as climate change gains importance in every political agenda, the debate at UNFCCC has steered away from the merely environmental and more towards political discourse.

Part of the problem was trying to work on two things at once. Extending Kyoto might have been doable, but the stubborn refusal of the US to adopt it pushed the interested parties to develop a second agreement that courted Washington's approval but that was in turn refused by many developing nations. The second track pushed the first one to the back burner in many desks, and it is the opinion of some people present in Copenhagen that if the focus had been solely on extending Kyoto, this might have been achieved.

The political focus that this has adopted gives the Venezuelan president yet another podium to stubbornly oppose any prposal backed by the US. Venezuela signed and ratified Kyoto in 197, two years before Chávez became dictator. Back then, there must not have been a big reason for him reject the accord. But today, when he needs only to pompously stand and just say 'No' to derail the closest thing to a global binding agreement on climate change, he must feel (wrongly) vindicated.

Is this blind opposition to Washington his only motivation? It most certainly is not. There os a very important factor in the equation. The more the world steers away from fossil fuels (namely oil) the more the Venezuelan government will see its ability to remain in power threatened. The country's stability depends directly on the income generated from selling oil. If the world suddenly decides (or, through a Kyoto-style agreement, is forced to) move towards electric cars, solar panels, wind turbines, and other renewable energy sources, Chávez's government will see itself become unable to remain standing. If the radical leftists in Caracas are taken out of the picture, the whole of Latin America's extreme left governments and parties will take a serious blow.

I've said before that, regardless of what happened in Copenhagen, we all have the moral imperative to do whatever we can on a personal and local level to stop and revert climate change. If this happens, benefits to our living standards and the world's ecosystems are a given. Now, there's an additional benefit: removing Chávez from power.

So, let's use public transportation and bicycles. Let's recycle, and let's become more conscious of our impact on the environment. Venezuela will be thankful for that.

Of Mandela and Rugby

I just finished reading Playing the Enemy, by John Carlin. Fantastic read. This book is the basis for Clint Eastwood's newest film, Invictus, starring Morgan Freeman as the South African leader, and Matt Damon as François Pienaar, captain of the Springbok squad that won the 1995 Rugby World Cup. I have to say, I have yet to see the film, but it's been gathering some very positive reviews.

Anyways, back to the book...

Carlin tells a great story, of how Mandela used the 1995 Rugby World Cup to bind the people of South Africa together. A premise that might sound Disney-esque if it weren't for it actually being real. But the book is no 'underdog wins it all' story, but rather an exploration of Nelson Mandela's actions and nation-building talent, his odyssey from prison to presidency, and his vision for his country. It also depicts, through interviews, the evolution of thought of certain key characters in South African history, but also of some minor players, average people, both black and white, giving us a very human view of the leader and the country.

The story begins with Mandela in jail, and slowly progresses towards his eventual liberation, to his election as president, to the World Cup. One thing Carlin does brilliantly is showing what was going on at different levels of the government. And that is quite a feat, to portray the heads of South Africa's apartheid government as human beings - fallible, of course, but all the more human because of this.

Chronologically the book starts while Mandela was still a prisoner at Robben Island, somewhere in the mid-80s, and progresses until right after the '95 World Cup. A short coda is given, telling us where the main characters of the book are now. And through interviews recounting the events, the story becomes one of those yarns that almost feels like fiction. Indeed, the story of Nelson Mandela and South Africa might almost be a fairy tale.

What's not to like about the book? Well, probably the one weakness is the over-romanticising of the story. One game, even one World Cup final, do not a nation build. It is clear that this was a big step in the right direction, and an inspired decision for Mandela, but Carlin makes it look as if this game was the focal point upon which the new nation would be built. History tells us that the country went through big turmoil before reaching stability Many different factors contributed to it being reached, and if one of them had been absent (say, if the Springboks had lost the World Cup) the outcome would have been barely different, if at all. But Carlin is here to sell us the epic story of one of the great leaders of our time and his idea of using sport as something over which differences might be forgotten and new worldviews formed.

In the end we have a story that, while factual, is fantastic enough to be made into a movie. But the important part is not the rugby match. It was the work and life of a great leader, the kind of which nations are lucky to have once every other generation. A leader to inspire a country and the world. The rugby is just the icing on the cake.

Copenhagen: The Big Picture

A couple of days ago, my friend Henning Gloystein wrote an article that clarifies a lot of what's going on in Copenhagen, where a decision is expected tomorrow. I'll now reproduce his article, which I think is extremely helpful. The highlited parts are my own doing:

With all the acronyms, the multi-tiered negotiating structure and rapidly-changing schedules, it is easy to forget the big picture at COP-15. So to review the main headline issues while the informal closed-door talks go on, we’re taking this opportunity to remind ourselves of just what the overall issues are:

1. The US won’t sign up to Kyoto. This has never really been a question, but it’s important to bear in mind given the G77 (developing) country positions.

2. The EU and other developed nations want the US to take on a legally-binding commitment to reduce emissions but this, given the above, will only happen under the negotiations being carried out in the AWG-LCA track.

3. The EU, Japan and other developed countries prefer a single, legally-binding solution that includes all developed countries rather than two parallel agreements: another vote for the LCA solution.

4. African nations want, above all, a second commitment period to the Kyoto Protocol, so a single treaty solution (unless it’s the Kyoto Protocol) is unacceptable to them. They worry that the developed country insistence on bringing the US into a post-2012 framework through the LCA track means that the Kyoto Protocol might be side-tracked and quietly dumped.

5. The G77 is not entirely unanimous on this, though; some member nations have also called for a single agreement.

6. The Tuvalu proposals for a pair of treaties is equally contentious, as it calls for voluntary but binding actions by major developing countries as well as a second commitment period under Kyoto. This is probably the main reason why it’s been held up and why the COP and CMP are suspended.

What these all mean then is that the immovable object (the US) is meeting the irresistible force (G77 and China). For progress to be made in Copenhagen, there needs to be a strong assurance for developing countries that whatever comes out of the LCA track will assume a legally-binding nature. So far, they don’t even have that, hence their extreme reluctance to let go of the AWG-KP track.

Who’s going to give?

We suspect that it will be the developing countries that may be forced to take a step back, but they will exact a stiff price. If a single treaty is the only way by which developed countries will take on further commitments that include the US and the voluntary actions from the emerging economies, then the G77 will want to see a concrete agreement in Copenhagen that sets the timetable for a binding, ratifiable treaty next year.

A vague political statement that expresses a vague intention to come to an agreement at some vague time in the future will not be enough, and this is where the developed countries may have to do some giving of their own. If they want to transition from Kyoto to a new treaty, they’re going to have to offer guarantees that it will become as legally-binding as Kyoto is, if not more.

Copenhagen may yet produce a mandate for such a new treaty, but it’s in the balance at the moment.

Published December 14th 2009, by Henning Gloystein

Comments and responses can be made here, and I'll forward them to Henning.

Copenhagen Walk Out

So, representatives from the African countries have walked out from key working group meetings as a protest against the developed nations' plans to scrap Kyoto, as stated by the BBC and the Financial Times.

What dows this mean? Roughly, that developing nations including the African countries, Brazil, China, and India want to keep the Kyoto protocol in place, specifically the measures that legally bind the developed countries (that is, the USA, the European Union, and the other 'first world' nations) to cuts in their carbon emissions, a measure that does not extend to them. If scrapped, Kyoto would be replaced with a new agreement that binds everybody to emission reductions, legally.

Again, the old argument that 'you polluted first while growing, now it is my turn and screw the consequences, you clen it up'.

While I understand this mindset, I have to say I find it particularly surprising in the cases of China and Brazil. The former is well on its way to becoming the world leader in clean technology if it keeps this pace, and binding itself to do so legally would only make it official and could only work in their favour financially, as other countries would surely start buying Chinese-made wind turbines and solar panels. Brazil, in turn, is the world leader in bioethanol production and use, which gives it an edge in this scenario, and with the Amazon rainforest, it literally controls one of the world's biggest carbon sinks.

So, why this stubborn opposition to scrapping Kyoto in favour of a much more committed agreement?

The reasons might be varied, and mostly political. I think there's also an inherent fear to commit to something that might prove to be beyond the current technological prowess of the nations involved. To this I say, don't fret and embrace the agreements, and commit yourselves to emissions below (way below) 1990 levels. It is most certainly the only way to slow down and start reversing climate change. To comply with a low-carbon economy, innovation will have to be the name of the game in the years to come.

And what happens if no agreement is reached in Copenhagen? My personal stance is that we each have the moralimperative to reduce our own carbon footprint and demand of our leaders, at least at a local level, to do as much as possible to promote a more eco-friendly economy. If our leaders don't do it, we as citizens and voters, and as consumers and business-owners, should go straight at it. Curiously enough, this is the same spirit of this Timberland campaign. Food for thought, if nothing else.

One thing is certain: those countries who go to war against climate change and carbon emissions will reap the benefits of a war economy, with none of the moral damage it carries. Innovation has always proved to be one of the driving forces of economy and one of the factors that make our lives better. And those nations that embrace this and innovate will not only help stop climate change, they will also make a killing in the process.

Rule 32

Saw this movie the other day, Zombieland. I am no fan of zombie movies, but this one is entertaining enough. Moreover, it has this character, a completely paranoid and socially inept guy who credits his 'rulebook' with his continued survival in this zombie infested US of A.

Rules like 'Cardio' and 'Always check the back seat' are complemented at one point in the movie by one addition from Woody Harrelson's character:


RULE 32: ENJOY THE LITTLE THINGS.

That is, to put it succinctly, one of the ultimate rules for survival in the modern world.

Strange to find such wisdom in a zombie film of all places.

Magic Mouse

I've been using my new Magic Mouse for a couple of weeks now, and it would be fair to say that I am very satisfied. But not completely.

See, this is a lovely piece of hardware. Its lines are clean, its glass cover makes it shiny, and the minimalism of its featureless design is, simply put, awesome.

When I say 'featureless design' I am most certainly referring to the physical design of the device. Technologically speaking, it is full of nifty characteristics: blue-tooth connectivity, a multi-touch surface that can recognise how many and which fingers you're using to tap its surface or to swipe it, translating either into a variety of commands on screen. As most things Apple does, this device is elegant, functional, and cool as hell.

Perfect? No, not by a long shot. It will occasionally lose connection with the computer for no apparent reason and then take ages to reconnect (this has happened three times in as many weeks). It is sensitive, so it will many times interpret random, extremely slight, and naturally unavoidable motions of my fingers as commands (it is rather annoying to be reading a webpage and have it go back simply because the Magic Mouse thought I was swiping my fingers across its surface when in reality they were just resting there).

I would never recommend this device to anyone with the slightest hand or finger tremor, as it will prove challenging to not simply throw the thing out the window after a short while. For everybody else, keep in mind that it has some annoying quirks. Fortunately they're the kind that can be corrected via a software update, so hopefully Apple will give us one soon.

Edinburgh in Winter

Well, to start of this blog, I thought it would be a nice idea to talk about this, my adopted city, in the winter time.

Coming from the tropics, as I do, it can be unsettling (and certainly exotic) to find oneself in a city so untropical, with nights that seem to start earlier than they have any business doing, and that last way beyond our waking hours.

Cold, but seldom below freezing, it is the pervasive dampness of the Scottish weather the part that is most unpleasant about this environment. But at the same time, it allows me to experience Christmastime in a way that I simply can't back home, with big coats and gloves, scarves and hats, my breath forming clouds in front of me at every step, and maybe snow. That is, if we are lucky. Still, chances are way better of it snowing in Edinburgh than of a single snow flake falling in Mexico City.

Edinburgh goes through several phases during the year. In January, winter is at its hardest and people generally hide themselves at work, at home, and at the local pub. Some hardy souls can be seen jogging or playing in the parks, but the city's bustle acquires this characteristic hurriedness of not really wanting to be outside. February and March are time for the Six Nations Rugby tournament, and the whole city seems to be submerged in the rugby environment. Spring arrives in May or thereabouts, and while the weather can still change in a matter of seconds and become patently horrible, it is these months when we enjoy long days, sun, and being able to walk in sandals. The parks become a haven for young people looking to simply lay on the green grass, play on the grass, enjoy a picnic on the grass, or smoke some grass. Pub activity, previously confined to within the pub itself, has moved outside, and those few pubs that happen to have a patio, terrace, or at the very least a generous portion of sidewalk in front can see their patronage increase dramatically.

August brings about THE FESTIVAL. Actually a collection of festivals, including the Fringe, the Military Tatoo, and the Book Fair, the Festival once again transforms the city into a bustling, thriving place where random performers populate the streets, outnumbered only by the hordes of young people in costumes trying to steer you into this or that venue to watch or take part in whichever performance they are working for, or with. September brings about a different kind of bustle, that of students returning to Edinburgh after the summer break, or arriving for the first time to begin their university studies. Many of them can be seen wandering the streets close to their respective schools, some with their parents, some by themselves, more often than not in groups of several. At night, this wandering transforms itself into drunken stumbling (a favourite sport amongst young people in this latitudes), situation that happens again and again, night after night.

Finally, winter arrives, the original topic of this post before I digressed. A German market next to the Scottish National Gallery, mulled wine in many bars, and a very Christmasy spirit that can't really be erased by the gloomy clouds and rainy weather. Wind, hail, rain, all of that pales when I can walk out of my building one fine day and see the Meadows, white with frost, the air cold and crisp, and the sky blue and cloudless. Cold sun, as it is - an interesting phenomenon for us tropic dwellers. And a beautiful one.