Is nuclear energy good for the climate?

 Supporters of nuclear energy say it can help us wean our economies off polluting fossil fuels. No surprise, it’s a heated issue. But what about the facts? Can nuclear power really help save the climate?

The latest figures on global carbon dioxide emissions call into question the world’s efforts to tackle the climate crisis. CO2 emissions are set to soar 4.9% in 2021, compared with the previous year, according to a study published earlier this month by the Global Carbon Project (GCP), a group of scientists that track emissions.

In 2020, emissions dropped 5.4% due to the COVID-19 pandemic and associated lockdowns. Most observers expected a rebound this year — but not to such an extent. The energy sector continues to be the largest emitter of greenhouse gases, with a share of 40% — and rising.

But what about nuclear? Supporters of the controversial energy source say it’s a climate-friendly way to generate electricity. At the very least, it’s something we could use until we’re able to develop comprehensive alternatives. In recent weeks, particularly during the COP26 climate summit, advocates have been creating a stir online with statements like “if you’re against nuclear energy, you’re against climate protection” and “nuclear energy is about to make a comeback.” But is there anything to it?

Is nuclear power a zero-emissions energy source?

No. Nuclear energy is also responsible for greenhouse gas emissions. In fact, no energy source is completely free of emissions, but more on that later.

When it comes to nuclear, uranium extraction, transport and processing produces emissions. The long and complex construction process of nuclear power plants also releases CO2, as does the demolition of decommissioned sites. And, last but not least, nuclear waste also has to be transported and stored under strict conditions — here, too, emissions must be taken into account.

And yet, interest groups claim nuclear energy is emission-free. Among them is Austrian consulting firm ENCO. In late 2020, it released a study prepared for the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs and Climate Policy that looked favorably at the possible future role of nuclear in the Netherlands.

“The main factors for its choice were reliability and security of supply, with no CO2 emission,” it read. ENCO was founded by experts from the International Atomic Energy Agency, and it regularly works with stakeholders in the nuclear sector, so it’s not entirely free of vested interests.

At COP26, environmental initiative Scientists for Future (S4F) presented a paper on nuclear energy and the climate. The group came to a very different conclusion. “Taking into account the current overall energy system, nuclear energy is by no means CO2 neutral,” they said.

Ben Wealer of the Technical University of Berlin, one of the report’s authors, told DW that proponents of nuclear energy “fail to take into account many factors,” including those sources of emissions outlined above. All the studies reviewed by DW said the same thing: Nuclear power is not emissions-free.

How much CO2 does nuclear power produce?

Results vary significantly, depending on whether we only consider the process of electricity generation, or take into account the entire life cycle of a nuclear power plant. A report released in 2014 by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), for example, estimated a range of 3.7 to 110 grams of CO2 equivalent per kilowatt-hour (kWh).

It’s long been assumed that nuclear plants generate an average of 66 grams of CO2/kWh — though Wealer believes the actual figure is much higher. New power plants, for example, generate more CO2 during construction than those built in previous decades, due to stricter safety regulations.

Studies that include the entire life cycle of nuclear power plants, from uranium extraction to nuclear waste storage, are rare, with some researchers pointing out that data is still lacking. In one life cycle study, the Netherlands-based World Information Service on Energy (WISE) calculated that nuclear plants produce 117 grams of CO2 emissions per kilowatt-hour. It should be noted, however, that WISE is an anti-nuclear group, so is not entirely unbiased.

However, other studies have come up with similar results when considering entire life cycles. Mark Z. Jacobson, director of the Atmosphere / Energy Program at California’s Stanford University, calculated a climate cost of 68 to 180 grams of CO2/kWh, depending on the electricity mix used in uranium production and other variables.

How climate-friendly is nuclear compared to other energies?

If the entire life cycle of a nuclear plant is included in the calculation, nuclear energy certainly comes out ahead of fossil fuels like coal or natural gas. But the picture is drastically different when compared with renewable energy.

According to new but still unpublished data from the state-run German Environment Agency (UBA) as well as the WISE figures, nuclear power releases 3.5 times more CO2 per kilowatt-hour than photovoltaic solar panel systems. Compared with onshore wind power, that figure jumps to 13 times more CO2. When up against electricity from hydropower installations, nuclear generates 29 times more carbon.

Could we rely on nuclear energy to help stop global warming?

Around the world, nuclear energy representatives, as well as some politicians, have called for the expansion of atomic power. In Germany, for example, the right-wing populist AfD party has backed nuclear power plants, calling them “modern and clean.” The AfD has called for a return to the energy source, which Germany has pledged to phase out completely by the end of 2022.

Other countries have also supported plans to build new nuclear plants, arguing that the energy sector will be even more damaging for the climate without it. But Wealer from Berlin’s Technical University, along with numerous other energy experts, sees takes a different view.

“The contribution of nuclear energy is viewed too optimistically,” he said. “In reality, [power plant] construction times are too long and the costs too high to have a noticeable effect on climate change. It takes too long for nuclear energy to become available.”

Mycle Schneider, author of the World Nuclear Industry Status Report, agrees.

“Nuclear power plants are about four times as expensive as wind or solar, and take five times as long to build,” he said. “When you factor it all in, you’re looking at 15-to-20 years of lead time for a new nuclear plant.”

He pointed out that the world needed to get greenhouse gases under control within a decade. “And in the next 10 years, nuclear power won’t be able to make a significant contribution,” added Schneider.

“Nuclear power is not being considered at the current time as one of the key global solutions to climate change,” said Antony Froggatt, deputy director of the environment and society program at the international affairs think tank Chatham House in London.

He said a combination of excessive costs, environmental consequences and lack of public support were all arguments against nuclear power.

Nuclear funding could go toward renewables

Due to the high costs associated with nuclear energy, it also blocks important financial resources that could instead be used to develop renewable energy, said Jan Haverkamp, a nuclear expert and activist with environment NGO Greenpeace in the Netherlands. Those renewables would provide more energy that is both faster and cheaper than nuclear, he said.

“Every dollar invested in nuclear energy is therefore a dollar diverted from true urgent climate action. In that sense, nuclear power is not climate-friendly,” he said.

In addition, nuclear energy itself has been affected by climate change. During the world’s increasingly hot summers, several nuclear power plants have already had to be temporarily shut down or taken off the grid. Power plants depend on nearby water sources to cool their reactors, and with many rivers drying up, those sources of water are no longer guaranteed.

The much vaunted “renaissance of nuclear power” is anything but when all the facts are taken into consideration, Mycle Schneider told DW. He said the nuclear industry has been shrinking for years.

“In the last 20 years, 95 nuclear power plants have gone online and 98 have been shut down. If you take China out of the equation, the number of nuclear power plants has shrunk by 50 reactors in the last two decades,” Schneider added. “The nuclear industry is not thriving.”

Written by Joscha Weber

Source: Indian Express, 1/12/21

With India’s demographic transition, come challenges

 

Sonalde Desai, Debasis Barik write: The demographic dividend is smaller, but will last longer due to regional variation in the onset of fertility decline. As southern states struggle with the growing burden of supporting the elderly, northern states will supply the workforce needed for growth.

Success brings its challenges. The first challenge is accepting the win, the second is to learn to live with it. Recent results from National Family Health Survey-5 (NFHS-5) suggest that we are entering an era where we will have to tackle these challenges. NFHS-5 places the total fertility rate (TFR) at 2.0. With two parents having two children, we have reached a replacement level of fertility. Due to many young people, the population will continue to grow, but the replacement level fertility is a significant milestone in India’s demographic history. This decline is spread evenly across the country, with 29 states and UTs having a TFR of 1.9 or less, with seven below 1.6. All southern states have a TFR of 1.7-1.8, similar to that of Sweden. Even states that have not reached replacement fertility — Bihar and Uttar Pradesh — seem to be headed in that direction. Between 2015-16 and 2019-20, UP’s TFR has declined from 2.7 to 2.4, while Bihar’s TFR has declined from 3.4 to 3.0. Part of the original coterie of lagging states, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan both have achieved TFRs of 2.0.

This success, however, brings its challenge. As fertility declines, the proportion of the older population grows, and societies face the challenge of supporting an ageing population with a shrinking workforce. This challenge is greater for leaders at the beginning of the demographic transition — Kerala and Tamil Nadu. According to the National Statistical Office, while the proportion of population greater than age 60 was 8.6 per cent for India as a whole in 2011, it was 12.6 per cent for Kerala and 10.4 per cent for Tamil Nadu, projected to increase further to 20.9 per cent and 18.2 per cent respectively by 2031. Interestingly, these are also among the more prosperous states in India, whose economic activities increasingly rely on migrant labour from other states. With a paucity of data on migration, it is not easy to estimate the dependence on migrant workers, but the Covid crisis and mass return migration of interstate workers suggest that many industries such as auto parts manufacturing and construction in southern states rely on semi-skilled migrants, often transported under contractual arrangements, from northern and eastern states, particularly Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Odisha.

With ageing states increasingly relying on a workforce from relatively younger states to maintain their economic prosperity, it may be time for us to change our mindset about critical dimensions of India’s federalism. Concern with population growth and a desire to not reward non-performing states have shaped inter-state relations in India over the past decades, shaping the allocation of political power and central resources devolved to states.

While the Indian constitution mandates allocation of Lok Sabha seats across states in proportion to their population via the Delimitation Commission, the Emergency-era 42nd amendment froze seat allocation to the population share of states in the 1971 Census. This freeze, originally expected to end in 2001, was further extended until after the 2031 Census by the 84th amendment. This has led to a much greater population per constituency in northern states than in southern states. In 2011, Uttar Pradesh had an average of 25 lakh persons per constituency, while Tamil Nadu had 18.5 lakh.

The division of central allocation to states is another area where population concerns have dominated equity considerations. Much of the Centre-state revenue sharing occurs through recommendations of various Finance Commissions. The sixth to fourteenth Finance Commissions allocated resources between states using the 1971 population shares of various states. The Fifteenth Finance commission used Census data from 2011, but it also added the criteria of demographic performance, rewarding states with lower TFR.

In view of sustained fertility decline in all states and the overall attainment of replacement level fertility nationally, should a focus on demographic performance continue to trump principles of equity? The answer depends on our view of India’s demographic future. Does India want to pursue China’s route of sharply lower fertility, with a large number of families stopping at one child, or are we content with moderately below replacement fertility of about 1.7-1.8? If the latter, we are well-positioned to head in this direction. Little needs to be done beyond improving the quality of family planning services for couples already desirous of small families.

In our opinion, trying to aim for a very low fertility of TFR below 1.5 will be a mistake. As China’s experience shows, while very low fertility provides a temporary demographic dividend with a reduced number of dependents to workers, the increased burden of caring for the elderly may become overwhelming over the long term. India is fortunate that its demographic dividend may be smaller, but is likely to last for a more extended period due to regional variation in the onset of the fertility decline. As southern states struggle with the growing burden of supporting the elderly, northern states will supply the workforce needed for economic growth. The increasing pace of migration may help shore up economic expansion in the south with its shrinking workforce augmented by workers from other states.

If we choose to follow this path of moderate fertility decline coupled with inter-state sharing of demographic dividend, there is little justification for continuing to punish states that entered the demographic transition later. The Sixteenth Finance Commission and the next Delimitation Commission must be freed from the burden of managing the demographic transition, focused on carrying out their tasks in the best interests of Indian federalism.

Written by Sonalde Desai , Debasis Barik 

Source: Indian Express, 1/12/21

Quote of the Day November 30, 2021

 

“Even if you are on the right track, you'll get run over if you just sit there.”
Will Rogers

“आप सही रास्ते पर हों तब भी अगर आप बैठे रहेंगे तो आप पीछे रह जाएंगें।”
विल रॉजर्स

The privilege of ageing

 

For ageing, one has to live, and when one lives with satisfaction and happiness, there need be no regret

“Sir, you don’t look a day older than 50!” This was the optician, while going through the date of birth entry in the form I was required to fill. My wife, who was with me, immediately whispered into my ears that I should take this remark merely as a marketing strategy.

Not having any requirement of strategies, marketing or otherwise, she was in no frame of mind to have me harbour any grandiose delusions of my age! Be that as it may, I was left wondering why should people get concerned if they get old or look as old as they are. The desire of getting to be told that they look younger than they are is, perhaps, an understandable variant of vanity.

One often comes across observations such as “He/she is so graceful even at his/her age” or “He/she has aged gracefully.” I presume the observation, at least in part, is based on seeing people who have accepted old age with dignity and a measure of calmness. On the other hand, there are people who appear tormented and beleaguered by age and show it too and when that happens, we say, “He/she looks so much older than he/she is.”

Ageing is a natural process and not a matter of choice, but how we handle it, is! There is no known elixir bestowing on humans youth and vitality which will defy and reverse the process of ageing. And thank god for that! Imagine a world bursting at the seams with young “old” people who have defied ageing!

A wise man had once said, “A beautiful face in youth is the result of fortune; a beautiful face in old age is earned by kindness and wisdom.” There are, of course, challenges in how parents and senior citizens are treated by their children. Some cases of “seniors” being ignored or being stifled financially or emotionally or both are dark and sinister facts of today’s times, and though laws such as the Maintenance of Parents and Senior Citizens (Amendment) Bill, 2019 (awaiting passage in Parliament) are on the anvil, what is required is understanding and empathy, not limited to finances alone, from the kin of the seniors.

Since ageing is inevitable in life’s journey, it is important also to explore and find ways and means to enjoy the journey. These days, concepts such as assisted living with regular health check-ups and nursing care have found currency. In such senior citizens’ homes, “seniors” are eased into secured community living sans the hassles of mundane household chores such as dusting, cleaning and even cooking.

For ageing, one has to live, and when one lives with satisfaction and happiness, there need be no regret, for as is said, “Do not regret growing older, it is a privilege denied to many.”

Ashok Warrier

Source: The Hindu, 28/11/21

It’s all in the mind: Transforming from cost leaders to thought leaders

 Let me explain. I was born a decade before India liberalized. While I was spared the acute insecurities of our parents’ generation which grew in a newly independent, socialist India, I have had my share. My first time abroad in the late 1990s was eye-opening: sleek air-conditioned taxis instead of rickety Ambassadors, comfortable public transport instead of tin boxes, pothole-free roads where vehicles followed lanes and traffic rules.Subsequently, the engineering college I went to resembled an international departure lounge. Not going abroad was considered a mark of lower calibre.

This trend continued when I started working. In one international consulting firm, I was sent to Sweden to identify “low-end" work that could be done in India. Ironically, the consultants doing this work were from the most competitive colleges in the world. I know someone who ranked in the teens in IIT-JEE and was being used by a similar international firm to provide back-end valuation support. India-based consultants, no matter how capable, were meant to deliver non-core, low-end work cheap, and increase project margins. This business model is now leveraged by almost all international consulting firms.

A familiar story

Similarly, India’s enduring success story, the IT services industry, is built predominantly around this cost-leadership framework. Clients are willing to pay a substantial premium for foreign firms compared to their Indian counterparts, though both get most of their work done in India, often leveraging the same talent pool.

It is the same in management consulting. As we build an India-bred global consulting firm, we get regularly raided by international majors for talent. The same consultants are then deployed at twice or thrice the rate (sometimes, ironically, to the same client). This rate jumps to five or six times when the same consultant relocates abroad. Effectively, clients are willing to spend five to six times on the same consultant based on the brand and location.

This creates a vicious cycle. Clients expect Indian firms to be cheap, irrespective of the quality of work. Indian firms find it easy to sell at lower costs, even when the quality is world-class. As we try to sell globally, based on the quality of our work rather than cost, we are experiencing the systemic challenges this vicious cycle creates for India-bred firms.

Fortunately, things are changing. In the past five years, I have landed at foreign airports and overheard comments on how Indian airports are much better. Forward-thinking global infrastructure companies prefer to be in India, given its evolved public-private partnership framework. One of our Japanese clients recently acquired an Indian technology firm to access its offerings and leadership, not cheap engineers. Our SaaS (software-as-a-service) companies are competing effectively with their global counterparts. India’s digital payment infrastructure is world-class, as is its ability to deliver social services through technology (think Co-Win.) India is attracting an unprecedented amount of venture capital that is transforming our startup ecosystem. Today, in India’s top campuses, students aspire for product management roles in startups, not go abroad.

A new business model

While jingoistic claims of general superiority are self-defeating, the fact is that India now has enough instances where it is world-class. We need to identify these areas and take our expertise to the world and charge top dollars for it. Covid-19 has ensured that clients are now willing to pay for talent and quality, not location or brand. This is our chance to transition our business models from cost to thought leadership.

Unfortunately, mindsets require much longer to change than political or economic realities. It is difficult to pivot from decades of competing on price to winning based on quality. Repositioning Indian services companies as thought leaders will require firm commitment, consistent messaging, sustained advocacy and, most importantly, a deep conviction that we can win by adding world-class value, not just by being cheap.

India’s evolution from cost to thought leadership needs to start in our minds. And quickly.

Abhisek Mukherjee is co-founder and director, Auctus Advisors.

Source: Mintepaper, 29/11/21

What is the Farm Laws Repeal Bill, 2021?

 The Lok Sabha Monday passed the Farm Laws Repeal Bill, 2021 without any discussion. The Bill, which is aimed at repealing three farm laws, was introduced in the house by Union Minister of Agriculture and Farmers’ Welfare Narendra Singh Tomar.

What is the Farm Laws Repeal Bill, 2021?

The Farm Laws Repeal Bill, 2021 is aimed at repealing the three farm laws – Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Act, 2020, the Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Act, 2020, the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act, 2020 – and amending the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The Bill was necessitated after Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced the government’s intention to repeal the three laws in view of ongoing farmers’ protests against these laws on November 19. Two days after the Prime Minister’s announcement, the Union Cabinet cleared the draft of the Bill. Now the Bill has been introduced in Lok Sabha.

How many sections are there in the Bill?

The six-page Bill contains only three sections. The first section defines the title of the Act – the Farm Laws Repeal Act, 2021, the second section has provisions to repeal three farm laws, and the third section relates to omitting sub-section (1A) from section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.

What is sub-section (1A) under section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act which is being removed?

The government had inserted sub-section (1A) in the section 3 of the Essential Commodity Act, 1955 that empowers the government to control production, supply, distribution, etc., of essential commodities. The sub-section (1A) provides a mechanism to regulate the supply of foodstuffs, including cereals, pulses, potato, onions, edible oilseeds and oils under “extraordinary circumstances” which may include war, famine, extraordinary price rise and natural calamity of grave nature. It also prescribes the price triggers for imposing stock limits. Under the sub-section (1A), any action on imposing stock limit shall be based on price rise and an order for regulating stock limit of any agricultural produce may be issued if there is a hundred per cent increase in the retail price of horticultural produce; or fifty per cent increase in the retail price of non-perishable agricultural foodstuffs, over the price prevailing immediately preceding twelve months, or average retail price of last five years, whichever is lower.

Has the government given any reason for repeal of the farm laws?

Agriculture Minister Narendra Singh Tomar, who piloted the Farm Laws Repeal Bill, 2021, has stated several reasons for taking this legislative step. In a statement of objects and reasons, which forms the part of the Bill, Tomar said, “Even though only a group of farmers are protesting against these laws, the Government has tried hard to sensitise the farmers on the importance of the Farm Laws and explain the merits through several meetings and other forums.”

“Without taking away the existing mechanisms available to farmers, new avenues were provided for trade of their produce. Besides, farmers were free to select the avenues of their choice where they can get more prices for their produce without any compulsion,” the statement said.

“However, the operation of the aforesaid Farm laws has been stayed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. During the COVID period, the farmers have worked hard to increase production and fulfil the needs of the nation. As we celebrate the 75th Year of Independence— “Azadi Ka Amrit Mahotsav”, the need of the hour is to take everyone together on the path of inclusive growth and development,” it said.

“In view of the above, the aforesaid Farm Laws are proposed to be repealed. It is also proposed to omit sub-section (1A) of section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (10 of 1955) which was inserted vide the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act, 2020 (22 of 2020),” it states.

How many days the farm laws were in effect?

The journey of three farm laws began on June 5, 2020 when the President of India promulgated three ordinances­ – Essential Commodities (Amendment) Ordinance, 2020; The Farming Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Ordinance, 2020; and The Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Ordinance, 2020. These ordinances were later replaced with proper legislation in September 2020. However, the implementation of three farm laws was stayed by the Supreme Court on January 12, 2021. So, these laws were in effect for only 221 days

Written by Harikishan Sharma

Source: Indian Express, 29/11/21

Quote of the Day November 29, 2021

 

“The consequences of today are determined by the actions of the past. To change your future, alter your decisions today.”
Anonymous

“आज के परिणाम अतीत के कर्मों से निर्धारित होते हैं। अपने भविष्य को बदल पाने के लिए अपने आज के फैसलों को बदलें।”
अज्ञात