Decouple

Is part of our rejection of expertise, distrust of science and weaponization of the precautionary principle tied to how suicidally close we came to mutually assured destruction during the cold war? What are the cultural drivers that have led the modern left to reject nuclear energy? How did we come to exaggerate the potential harms from a nuclear accident to biblical proportions? How is the idea of nuclear apocalypse different from climate apocalypse in terms of its imagery and cultural framing? I am joined by Spencer Weart the retired director of the Center for History of Physics for the American Institute of Physics to answer these questions. Spencer holds a Ph.D. in physics and astrophysics and has devoted much of his career to working as a historian of science. He is the author of a number of books including “The Rise of Nuclear Fear.” 

There is money to be made in Nuclear Fear. Consider this. In Japan over the last 10 years since the Fukushima accident, approximately 50 billion USD a year in additional fossil fuels have been traded to supply energy demands that would have been provided by Japan's shuttered nuclear plants. The ability to terrify people with the prospect of serious health harms from low dose radiation has kept most of the Japanese nuclear fleet idle and created an enormous market for LNG and Coal as well as a significant burden of disease secondary to particulate air pollution. On June 12th 1956 the National Academy of Sciences released its report on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR.) It became part of the basis for a paradigm shift in radiation protection towards the Linear No Threshold model which proposes that radiation is a uniquely dangerous toxin with no safe lower dose limit. The BIER report was funded by the Rockefeller Foundation whose endowment came directly from the Standard Oil Company. Did the Rockefeller Foundation and its fossil fuel baron patrons have a vested interest in exagerating the dangers of radiation to disparage a potentially disruptive, air pollution free technology that threatened the market share of the fossil fuel industry? Was their support coincidence, conspiracy or just good business acumen? I am joined by Rod Adams, a former US nuclear submarine engineer officer, who runs the Atomic Insights blog and hosts the Atomic Show podcast to discuss this tantalizing question.

I am joined by Robert Bryce, an American author, journalist, filmmaker and podcaster in a wide ranging discussion of the politics of the world's unfolding energy transitions.  Energy illiteracy is epidemic and basic concepts such as power density and scale are absent from most policy discussions. We discuss the impacts of fracking on the nuclear renaissance and the mounting resistance to wind and solar farms in rural America. Big decisions lie before our government representatives and the technological choices they make will be hugely consequential not only to limiting climate change but also the health and stability of the commons in the form of the network that underlies all modern networks, the grid. 

Fusion is supposed to be even more powerful than fission but without the baggage. It resonates with the appeal to nature fallacy with notions of bringing the power of the sun down to earth. 39 years ago Dr. L. Lidsky wrote that "The scientific goal of fusion energy turns out to be an engineer's nightmare."  Building a reliable, affordable power plant that requires achieving temperatures hotter than the sun and as cold as physically possible within several meters of each other all under the materially challenging conditions of high energy neutron bombardment is only the beginning. Low power densities and parasitic load further chip away at the potential performance of "the ultimate solution" to our clean energy challenges.  Gerrit Bruehogg is a nuclear engineer with a background in fission reactors and particle accelerators who is currently doing his thesis at the Laboratory for Laser Energetics on inertial confinement fusion. Join us for a lively discussion that leaves no subatomic particle unturned. 

Decouple is a show which is fundamentally about attitudes to technology and the role that decoupling technologies, so called technofixes, can play in mitigating and solving our environmental challenges. As we are becoming increasingly aware, geology and its earth systems have not just shaped us, we are shaping the earth through our technologies and indeed our most current geologic epoch, the anthropocene, bears our name as a result. In this episode we dive deep into geologic determinism and a history of technology made more entertaining by the thought experiment of exploring how to rebuild civilization after a global cataclysm with astrobiologist and polymath, Lewis Dartnell who is the author of the books "Origins" and "The Knowledge."

Nick Touran is a Ph.D. nuclear engineer and advanced reactor designer who runs the science education website whatisnuclear.com. Advanced and Small Modular Reactors have become the only politically safe nuclear power that western politicians are willing to touch with a 10 foot pole. Meanwhile existing plants doing much of the heavy lifting of decarbonisation are facing politically motivated premature closures and new builds of existing designs are seen as politically and financially unfeasible. There is a lot of hype around thorium, molten salt reactors, breeders and burners. There are also a lot of unanswered questions these designs will face if and when they are exposed to the challenges of existing in real life. Banking the West’s nuclear future and our climate response on potential paper tigers is a high risk move given the stakes and timeline of climate change.

"China will cut carbon emissions by over 65% by 2030" according to Chinese President Xi Jinping. In addition two new studies published by the leading and highly influential Chinese Climate research institutes at Tsinghua university model net-zero emissions by 2050 and carbon neutrality by 2060. These models suggest a 10x increase in solar and wind and a 7x increase in nuclear by 2050. By 2050 China is forecasted to have more nuclear capacity then the rest of the world combined.  What explains the policy shift away from a logic of differential responsibilities whereby climate change was seen as a problem created by the west and the west's responsibility to mitigate?  China is vulnerable to climate change. Energy security is a another major issue with the memory of a US imposed oil blockade during the Korean war and 70% of its oil being imported via the strategic and vulnerable straights of Malacca. Finally in the context of Trump's abandonment of the Paris Accords Chinese leadership on climate change comes with some soft power benefits.  I am joined by Dr. Seaver Wang a climate and energy analyst at the Breakthrough institute to break it all down for us.

Sometimes an outsider's perspective can lead to startling conclusions. Bret Kugelmass is a successful tech entrepreneur turned climate activist. His empiric analysis of the problem of climate change led him towards embracing nuclear energy as the only technology capable of scaling to achieve deep decarbonisation and powering negative emissions. After conducting well over 1000 interviews with nuclear engineers, regulators and analysts, Bret has developed some very bold and very controversial policy solutions to make nuclear energy cheaper then coal and unleash its climate change fighting potential. All he's got to do is convince an industry that it is its own worst enemy and to abandon some of its most central dogmas. 

Dr. Rudolf Virchow, one of the founders of scientific medicine, said that "Medicine is a social science, and politics is nothing more than medicine on a large scale." Beyond caring for the sick, doctors have played an important role in calling attention to the social determinants of health. International physicians for the prevention of nuclear war (IPPNW) played a pivotal role in the cessation of atmospheric nuclear weapons testing at the height of the cold war. This anti-weapons activism later came to be directed towards civilian nuclear energy by the likes of anti-nuclear crusader Dr. Helen Caldicott who is well known for her unwillingness to back up her outlandish claims with scientific evidence. Doctors for Nuclear Energy is a new international group of physicians who argue that nuclear energy is a keystone technology for the elimination of air pollution and CO2 emissions. Co-founders Dr. Van Der Merwe and Dr. Keefer share their perspectives on relative risk assessment, radiophobia and its public health consequences and our clean energy future.  https://www.patreon.com/decouple?fan_landing=true https://www.doctorsfornuclearenergy.org/

The host becomes the guest as I hand over the microphone to film maker and long time friend Jesse Freeston. Jesse got the Decouple podcast rolling by interviewing me about my vision for the project for our very first episode. He's back for a check in to explore what I have learned on the Decouple journey so far.  Twenty three episodes in we have a lot of ground to cover.  We welcome you behind the scenes. https://www.patreon.com/posts/decouple-on-41428860