Nuclear Plants Construction: a Proposal for Africa

The world´s surface temperature is changing in a fashion that doesn´t fully support widely accepted climate models (the data doesn’t fit the model predictions).  Most climatologists  agree that none of their models are correct because they are rough mathematical descriptions of the real world. This weakens the case being made for an urgent switch from fossil fuels to some other energy source.

However, the world will replace fossil fuels with some other form of energy and slow down greenhouse gas emissions. This will happen simply because we´ll have run out of oil, natural gas, and coal. The timing is highly uncertain, the changeover may be driven by climate change hysteria, or by astronomical fossil fuel prices.  

If you find the logic unconvincing, you are not alone. Some will think  it is obviously wrong; but it doesn´t matter. Change is inevitable, and don´t forget this:  you read it here first.  

This change requires a starting point, the development of alternative energy sources for the third world. Given its enormous population in this work we propose  the construction of sixty nuclear power plants in sub Saharan Africa. 

Koeberg, sub-Saharan Africa´s only nuclear power plant. 

Such a project would be an enormous triumph for the environment. Also, the first, 60 plant Phase I, would consume over $1 X 10¹² US Dollars (that´s  one trillion greenbacks for Americans), and generate hundreds of thousands of jobs. 

The outcome, unfortunately, is not a completely safe one. After we get the first 60  nuclear plants buit, the conditions may not be optimal and lead to a(many)  nuclear incident(s).  From this perspective, a nuclear power plant doesn´t solve the problem, it merely changes the kind of problems we would be facing.

Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant

Those of us who lobby for the nuclear power industry must thank god for the green house gas effect, because it boosts the case for the eventual  construction of several thousand nuclear power plants.  

To help us convince the public we have developed a serial theory which stands on quantum physics as developed by Max Planck, Max Born, Werner Heisenberg,  Wolfgang Pauli, Paul Dirac Erwin Schrödinger and others.

The nuclear plants we propose  follow the  fundamental laws of physics and  obey the principles of quantum mechanics. Rather than predicting definite outcomes, in this work  we estimate  probabilities of the members of an ensemble of many different experimental simulations. 

If an accident takes place in any part of this ensemble, and a radioactive cloud spreads, it creates an infinite number of individual universes. So even if an accident itself seems likely, multiplying by the infinite number of potential outcomes makes it quite likely that you, my dear reader, will find yourself in an acceptable situation in which you have escaped the radioactive cloud effects. 

To reduce the risk perception we propose a single plant be built on the Zambezi river, at the location shown below. A single plant built in the middle of darkest Africa shouldn´t create a radioactive cloud which reaches Europe, as per our climate model simulations. This should give you the assurance to support our project. 

Proposed nuclear plant site on the Zambezi

 river, at the  junction of 

Namibia, Zambia, Zimbabwe and Botswana. 

The multiverse of nuclear power accidents  is an  innovative solution, but the specific answers are a little vague because we simply don’t know how to do the math. How many accidents would take place?  How do we balance the solid physics and well known technology solutions with human nature? What about  the possible infinite proliferation of warlords armed with nuclear weapons? What if we end up having to wear radiation suits all the time? 

Radiation suits (intended to scare you a little bit)

 from The Economist 

The questions are worrisome, but they’re not intended to discourage you. Physical theories can yield chaotic answers  when mixed with human nature, and the truth will only be known after we built the plants and sufficient time has accumulated to understand the aftermath.

We know global warming can be controversial, and we see  extrapolations away from established physics which have failed to be  vindicated by new observations. If  the computer models we invented to explain observational data happen to be wrong we can always fall back on the previously mentioned: sooner or later we will run out of oil and coal. This confirms the theoretical basis for the construction of the first sixty nuclear power plants in Africa.