The question for those promoting renewable energy, at the expense of not only carbon-based fuels but of the economy, has always been: What happens when the sun goes down or the wind stops blowing?
We find out what happens when the sun goes down at least once a day. And in recent days, we've seen what happens when the wind stops blowing.
It stopped in the North Sea. And Europe's energy costs have gone through the roof.
Before we go much further, let us stipulate for the record, your honor, that these columns are no more anti-renewable energy than we are anti-Mom-and-apple-pie. There are a lot of conservative types in these latitudes who spend a lot of time doing outdoorsy stuff like hunting and fishing. And teaching our kids to hunt and fish and swim and hike and throw a football around the backyard. So we understand that when countries rely on so many coal-fired plants, we're not breathing Vitamin C in the deer stand.
But we also know that the world's engineers haven't improved batteries enough to keep the lights on without carbon fuels.
Dispatches say wind in the stormy North Sea, off the coast of the United Kingdom, isn't as stormy as it needs to be. Reuters says Europe should expect an expensive winter. The Wall Street Journal says energy prices have already been pushed up as the world comes out of the covid shutdown. Electricity prices in some parts of Europe have doubled. Imagine your $340 light bill going up to $700-plus. This would be considered poor form.
The BBC also reports that the socialist governments in Europe are on the ball. Spain's prime minister promised his people they'd pay no more for electricity in the coming months than they did in 2018. Put it on the credit card. In Greece, the government is planning energy subsidies. Etc.
But there is an option besides 1. renewables like solar and wind, and 2. carbon-based fuels.
If the world is ever going to stop building coal-fired plants, it's going to have to start building nuclear ones. Nuclear energy is cleaner--the kids call it greener--than coal or gas. And unlike solar and wind, it's available on still nights.
And we might as well face it: Americans, and people in the rest of the developed world, are not going to want less energy in the future. Televisions, light bulbs, air conditioners, computers and refrigerators aren't going away. If you must, turn down the AC and use energy-efficient dishwashers. That'll lower your bill, but it won't make your energy always reliable. Besides, the subdivision down the street will likely use all that energy you've saved, plus a lot more, in the coming years.
Yet it takes the better part of a decade to get a nuclear plant approved, built and online in this country. Back in the late 1970s, there were protests and movies and even a real-life Event at Three Mile Island. (The capital-E Event at Three Mile Island harmed exactly nobody. And experts say that locals around the plant could have been exposed to radiation as low as that of your typical chest X-ray.) With all the NIMBY protests, the building of new nuclear plants ground to a halt.
Imagine, today, a nuclear plant at every turn in the river. And a two-digit electric bill every month.
The only real argument against more nuclear plants may be this: The expended fuel is dangerous and a terror attack at just the right point and time could cause real damage and panic. Which is reason enough for extreme security. But not for avoiding such a clean, reliable fuel for all of our needs.
It'd be nice to have more environmentalists on the right side of this debate in the coming years. Especially when images start coming in from Europe this winter. Now that a real-life situation is developing for our friends across the pond, maybe our friends on the left will give nuclear power another chance. It'd be about time.