Decouple

What has the Energiewende achieved, what hasn't it? An interview with the spokesperson for the German delegation to COP26, Stephan Gabriel Haufe. We discuss the expedited nuclear phaseout, ongoing reliance on coal until 2038, advances in solar + wind energy and the Nordstream 2 gas pipeline.

Dr. Keefer sits down in Glasgow with Carine de Boissezon, who is the Chief Sustainability Officer at the French electric utility Électricité de France. Carine brings a valuable inside perspective on nuclear power in France, a country that Decouple has frequently regarded as an exemplar of rapid decarbonization. Reversing intentions to reduce France's share of electricity from nuclear from 75% to 50%, President Macron recently announced that France would "relaunch" its construction of nuclear reactors to meet growing electricity and decarbonization needs.  In this special in-person interview at COP26, we discuss how France has benefitted from nuclear power, what the nuclear "relaunch" means for the country, French public opinion, how renewables and nuclear interact, and more. Stay tuned for more COP26 content!

Decouple mobile studios reports from Glasgow, Scotland, where Dr. Keefer and other pro-nuclear advocates are attending COP26, the 2021 UN Climate Change Conference. Dr. Keefer is joined in-person by Eric Meyer, founder and executive director of the nuclear advocacy hub Generation Atomic, to discuss the goings on of COP26, the growing pro-nuclear movement, and the taboo subject of funding.

In this episode, I am joined by returning guest Michael Shellenberger. We briefly discuss his new book San Fransicko, which, like his best-seller Apocalypse Never, takes a heterodox stance on an issue that progressives feel they champion -- in this case, the drug and homelessness epidemic. We then transition to his past (and future) work in nuclear advocacy. Shellenberger has paid a toll for challenging orthodoxies within the environmental and nuclear communities, including the loss of many donors to his organization Environmental Progress. At the same time, he has managed to reach and engage broad audiences in a way that most within the environment and energy spheres only dream of. We dive into the internal politics of nuclear advocacy, even offering a taxonomy of the nuclear advocacy ecosystem. In this taxonomy, Shellenberger self-identifies as a mix of Libertarian and Climate-nuclear, though he is admittedly “lukewarm” on climate. Dr. Keefer and Shellenberger both worry that the nuclear establishment will “fuck up” its opportunity for another nuclear renaissance. Its attempts to placate the renewable lobby has, among other things, distracted from the value of existing nuclear. Shellenberger would prefer “boring nuclear,” proven designs done over and over, funded with patient capital, "pension fund stuff.” There are, however, reasons to be hopeful. Shellenberger calls a recent video posted to President Macron's Twitter, which situates nuclear in the context of technological sophistication, hope, and achievement, a “watershed moment in the pro-nuclear movement.” In major news media, pieces have come out about the pronuclear movements in Belgium, Germany, Japan, and elsewhere. It is a moment we need to seize. Lastly, we touch on Shellenberger’s view of the connection between nuclear energy and nuclear weapons. Moreso than other nuclear advocates, he sees them as connected. This is in fact a major topic in Shellenberger’s next book. Listen to Michael Shellenberger on Joe Rogan: https://open.spotify.com/episode/5NxzDE5TmviUV8te2eZjMP?si=pka9Kr0bTc2K1gEQMhYc1g Buy San Fransicko and Apocalypse Never.

In this special episode, I am joined live by filmmaker Jesse Freeston on the sunny beach in front of the Pickering Nuclear Generating Station, which provides Ontario with 3.2 GW of carbon-free electricity. I hand over the interviewer badge to Jesse for a second hour-long reflection on advocacy, antinuclearism, environmentalism, the Decouple journey, and anything else that crossed our minds on the scenic waterfront. Watch the interview on YouTube: https://youtu.be/IhkGTcULU54 Listen to the first reflections episode with Jesse Freeston: https://www.decouplepodcast.org/podcast/episode/1b36a823/reflections-on-the-decouple-journey-feat-jesse-freeston Stay tuned for Jesse's first episode of Decouple Studios later this week!

I am joined by Yuriy Humber, founder of Japan NRG, to discuss Japan’s complex relationship with nuclear technology and its energy issues past and present. The first and only wartime victim of atomic weapons, it went on to embrace nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, becoming a world leader in the manufacture of nuclear technology and relying on it for 30% of its electricity before turning against nuclear after the Fukushima accident in 2011. Public opinions against nuclear energy ran as high as 80% at one point. A decade on and with new commitments to reducing emissions, public opposition is turning, and the government wants to revive nuclear power to improve Japan’s energy security in the context of the country’s high dependency on fuel imports and ongoing energy shocks around the world. Japan has started to invest in nuclear power technologies again, with some private money going into Small Modular Reactors (SMR) in the U.S. and state funding trickling into Japan’s own High-Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor (HTGR) program. 
Although local municipalities have the final say on restarting nuclear power plants, Humber says that the pro-nuclear message has been re-gaining popularity with many arguing that Japan cannot meet its “green growth” strategy without it.
 We discuss how Japan went from being the victim of nuclear weapons to a major player in nuclear energy, tying that in with a broader history of energy of Japan, characterized by a series of rapid energy transitions. The transition from coal to nuclear could serve as an example to other countries, though it was a process that faced many challenges of its own and relied on making some promises the government ultimately couldn’t keep. As someone who lived near both the Chernobyl and Fukushima accidents at the time when they occured, Humber has a first hand perspective on the cultural and political changes around nuclear in 2011.  We discuss these aspects as well as technical problems facing Japanese energy supply following the closure of its many nuclear plants. Finally, we discuss the alternatives for Japanese decarbonization. The challenge of providing constant power to a megapolis such as the Tokyo metro area is immense. Already Japan has the most solar panels per square meter of any country on Earth. And it has ambitious plans for off-shore wind and eventually a hydrogen economy. Carbon capture has been discussed, yet only one geological carbon storage test facility exists in all of Japan. The obstacles to more ambitious renewables plans too are becoming clear, not only from land use, materials intensity, and issues of intermittency, but NIMBYism. About 1/10 of all municipalities in Japan have ordinances to limit wind and solar deployment or ban it completely. Offshore wind forecasts of 10 GW by 2030 and 45 GW by 2040-2045 have slowed to perhaps 2-3 GW by 2030. Even if Japan is able to rely on nuclear for 20-22% of its electricity needs, decarbonization will be a long and bumpy road, with a likely dependence on LNG and other fossil fuel imports for long into the future. Yuriy Humber is the founder of the Japan NRG platform, which provides regular information and analysis about the Japanese energy and power industry, markets, and policy. He is also a columnist on energy issues for the “Nikkei Asia” and co-author of an economic research report on Japan by the American Chamber of Commerce in Japan.

I am joined by returning guest and co-founder of The Breakthrough Institute, Ted Nordhaus, to discuss degrowth as a proposed solution to climate change and other environmental issues. Nordhaus has written forcefully against the idea of degrowth, which posits that growth in human populations and consumption levels will inevitably bring us to the brink of what this planet can sustain. The only way to avert catastrophe is to therefore reduce human populations and minimize consumption. Nordhaus’s objections are epistemological as well as pragmatic. While degrowth risks stalling innovation and adaptation in the face of climate change, it is unclear that the proclaimed limits to human consumption (at the root of degrowth thought) are actually knowable or would even be met in the normal course of human development. Nordhaus points out the difficulty of defining the line between necessity and luxury, and argues that there is no actual science or evidence behind claims that we are approaching or have passed “planetary boundaries.” Nordhaus emphasizes that he cares about the environment and other species, but that there are “non-apocalyptic reasons to protect nature.” As for what society should do to address the climate crisis and other environmental issues, Nordhaus offers a decision-making framework that acknowledges the vast uncertainties of any future scenario: Do more of the stuff that brings us in a direction we want to go, and less of the stuff that doesn’t. To Nordhaus, foretelling disaster based on what he says are unscientific limits to growth is “an authoritarian claim” that at best leads to regressive policies and at worst creates self-fulfilling prophecies. We go on to discuss the common use of WW2 as a metaphor for the scale of climate action needed, and contrast it with a Cold War metaphor that yields more technological optimism. Finally, we touch upon a concept near and dear to this podcast: decoupling. Read Ted Nordhaus's commentary on Vaclav Smil here: https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/must-growth-doom-the-planet

I am joined by returning guest Emmet Penney to discuss his new project, Nuclear Barbarians. The project is Emmet’s own brand of nuclear advocacy, differing starkly from most of the pro-nuclear movement, which he believes has been “captured by an environmental movement that hates it.” Emmet has set out on his own terms to convince a wide audience that nuclear power rules. Emmet offers a harsh critique of the environmental movement, tracing it from what he argues are its elite Victorian origins to the 1960s and later. In this broad conversation, we reflect on some prominent environmentalists, and search for a more nuanced vocabulary with which to understand environmentalism. Finally, Emmet laments not only the loss of manufacturing in the US, but disconnect and even resentment shown by elites to the work class. He argues that environmentalism today, as in the 60s, is an activity largely reserved for these elites that demonstrates a fairly open disdain for the working class. We discuss the importance of connecting with and valuing labour, particularly as we seek to decarbonize without jeopardizing our energy supply. Emmet Penney is a writer, the co-host of the Ex.Haust podcast, and the founder and host of Nuclear Barbarians. https://nuclearbarians.substack.com Warning: this episode contains strong language.

In a change of pace for Decouple, I am joined by Dr. Channa Prakash for a wide-ranging discussion on crop science and agriculture. We discuss biotechnology, its history, and the great positive changes it has brought to global food production. We also assess the strongest criticisms. Among those are concerns that we have become dependent on chemical inputs for farming, namely pesticides and fertilizers, and that this has often lead to the over-application of these chemicals resulting in environmental hazards. Additionally, many are concerned that a reliance on these chemical inputs, or on genetically modified crop varieties, has led to the “corporatization” of farming. Dr. Prakash brings numerous real-world examples policy blunders regarding food, often with destructive consequences. In particular, we focus in on Sri Lanka, where the recent banning of fertilizer and pesticide imports in a move to become an all-organic food exporter has set off a farming and economic crisis. The soft face of these harsh policies is the organic food movement, which has gained popularity in recent years. While some consumers may decide to purchase organic foods for a higher price, believing them to be more sustainably grown, organic certification opposes some of the very principles that have allowed us to feed growing populations. And it opposes the crop science that may enable us to use fewer pesticides and fertilizers, meet the nutritional of the hungry, and adapt to the challenges to food security posed by a changing climate. Finally, we take a step back to reflect on our relationship with food, why we have such strong opinions about how it’s grown and where it comes from, and patterns in the social acceptance of different technologies. Dr. Channa S. Prakash is a Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences at Tuskegee University (USA) where he has served as faculty since 1989 and is a professor of crop genetics, biotechnology, and genomics. Everybody should follow his fantastic Twitter profile: @AgBioWorld

I am joined again by Mark Nelson to speak on the energy shocks tearing through Europe and Asia. What are its causes, and what will its consequences be? The crisis comes on the heels of what academics and policymakers thought was an energy transition away from fossil fuels. But as countries pay record prices to scrap together enough coal, gas, and oil to avoid shortfalls, we are seeing just how unprepared they were for the fossil-free world they have been trying to create. The procurement of low-carbon energy sources was dominated by short-term thinking, favoring solar and wind over nuclear power, and pre-emptively drawing the line in the sand for fossil fuel investment. Mark reflects on European energy decisions over the past decades, the constant shaving down of reserve energy supplies for the sake of avoiding “wastefulness”, and how during the energy crises of the 1970s, some countries drew winning hands and others drew losing hands in their responses. Namely, those who drew winning hands built nuclear, and a lot of it. Mark worries that “it’s not clear that Europe knows how to expand energy production now, only reduce it.” Will this energy shock be a tipping point? Will it have sobering effects on the debate over the EU Green Taxonomy and the decision of whether to include nuclear power? As in the children’s story of the industrious ant and the worry-free grasshopper, will this winter reveal the stark differences between those who prepared and those who didn’t—those who shored up their own low-carbon energy supply with nuclear, and those who optimistically trotted down the path of solar, wind, interconnections, nuclear phase-outs, and gas imports?