Как авария на Фукусима повлияла на энергетическую политику Японии,Германии и США

Further legislative changes are also expected during the year, in particular regarding the energy efficiency of buildings and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from the transport sector.Certain adjustments are also made by the geopolitical aspect, in particular, the situation in Ukraine, which added a new dimension to Germany's ambitious goals to increase the share of renewable energy in its energy system. Germany's rapid elimination of fossil fuel imports has turned almost overnight from a moral obligation and a long-term measure to protect the environment to a matter of national security and short-term economic stability. Wind power, photovoltaic solar power, bioenergy, hydropower and other renewable energy sources have since come to be referred to as "energy of freedom".Chapter 3. US Energy Policy After 2011Public policy is central to any discussion of nuclear power in the US. The development of nuclear power began in 1945 as a government program following the Manhattan Project to develop the atomic bomb. The first nuclear reactor for power generation was built at the Idaho National Reactor Testing Station in December 1951, when the United States diverted significant resources to the development of civilian nuclear power. In the mid 1950s. Nuclear power generation was opened up to the private sector. However, the government is still more involved in commercial nuclear power than in any other industry in the US.Public opinion about nuclear power has so far been generally quite positive. The growing acceptance of nuclear power in the US was dramatically undermined by the 2011 Japanese accident. Images of explosions, massive floods, and general panic flooded all televisions in the United States. Percentage of respondents endorsing nuclear power plummeted from 57% to 43%.The anti-nuclear movement has grown.Despite the public backlash, on a political level, US officials were cautious. Thus, US Secretary of Energy Stephen Chu told Congress that the Obama administration intends to head for the underwriting of new nuclear power plants.Overall, the US response to the Fukushima accident was minimal. At the request of President Obama, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission conducted a safety review of all US nuclear power plants. All operating nuclear plants have been deemed safe, and some have been given safety recommendations to improve performance.President Obama has not relinquished his pro-nuclear stance, declaring that he "continues to support the expansion of nuclear power in the United States despite the crisis in Japan" and that nuclear power is "an important part of our own energy future". Already in February 2012, the NRC approved licenses for the construction of two new nuclear reactors. The development of the nuclear sphere was continued. Relatively new projects include:- In May 2020, the Department of Energy launched the $3.2 billion Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program to build two advanced reactors that could be operational within seven years;- The US Department of Energy's Universal Test Reactor program is preparing to build fast neutron irradiation facilities in the US by 2026.All of these project examples assume that the Fukushima accident did not affect US nuclear power policy at all. Moreover, it is safe to say that the US will continue to move in the pro-nuclear direction over the coming years. But it cannot be argued that nuclear power in the United States is an absolute priority supported by the authorities. The development of the nuclear direction is moving in parallel with other areas. In the US, as in other countries, there has also been a change in the structure of energy generation, and it is connected primarily with the shale revolution, but also with the policy in the field of renewable energy. The decline in fossil fuel production declined in the post-Fukushima years due to the prevalence of very cheap natural gas. While natural gas serves as a replacement for coal-fired power plants, it also reduces incentives to invest in more expensive renewable technologies. To reduce US emissions, the government has used fiscal stimulus and policy initiatives. In addition, 29 states have renewable portfolio standards that require a certain concentration of renewables in a state's energy portfolio. Although only 58% of states have renewables, they account for 67% of renewable energy capacity growth from 1998 to 2012. The share of RES in 2008 in the US energy structure was 9.25%.In 2021, the overall structure of electricity generated looked like this: 60.8% of electricity was generated by TPPs running on fossil fuels: 21.8% - on coal, 38.3% - on natural gas, 0.5% - on oil. 18.9% of electricity was generated by nuclear power plants; 6.3% - HPPs; 20.1% - RES: 1.3% generated by biofuel power plants, 0.4% - geothermal energy, 2.8% - solar energy, 9.2% - wind energy. As we can see, the share of renewable sources is growing rapidly.There is no doubt that the direction of renewable energy in the United States will develop at the state level and increase its share in the energy sector in the future. This is confirmed by the wordsU.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen on more accelerating the transition to renewable energy and a statementDepartment of Energy that by 2030, wind energy could generate 20% of electricity in the United States. Thus, the sustainable growth of renewable energy is the result of federal and state policies.ConclusionThus, nuclear power plays a critical role in the global energy portfolio to reduce emissions from energy production around the world to combat climate change. However, catastrophic events, such as the Fukushima-1 accident, threaten the proliferation of nuclear energy, and as a result, countries turn to other sources of energy to meet their energy needs. Fortunately, unlike previous nuclear disasters such as Chernobyl, countries with nuclear technology have increased their use of renewable energy as opposed to fossil fuels to meet their needs, indicating an increase in their awareness of climate change and the availability of renewable energy technologies.While individual countries respond differently to catastrophic events, the global energy portfolio has seen an increase in renewable production and capacity and a decrease in fossil fuel production and capacity compared to pre-Fukushima growth trends. In the four years after Fukushima, the 28 countries with nuclear capacity responded with ~290 TWh of additional renewable generation and ~30 GW of additional renewable capacity. At the same time, they reduced fossil fuel generation by about 135 TWh and fossil fuel capacity by about 15 GW. This results in a global reduction of 120 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions. Since Chernobyl, it has been estimated that global carbon dioxide emissions increased by 149 million metric tons, indicating a successful global transition to cleaner energy technologies.