Jan Willem Storm van Leeuwen
Jan Willem Storm van Leeuwen (born 1941, Dutch East Indies)[1] is a consultant in chemistry and energy systems. Storm van Leeuwen received his Master of Science, physical chemistry, at the Technical University Eindhoven. He is a senior scientist at Ceedata Consultants. He also develops courses for chemistry teachers for the Open University at Heerlen. He is the secretary of the Dutch Association of the Club of Rome. His two fields of expertise are technology assessment and life cycle analyses of energy systems, focussed on sustainability aspects. He published numerous reports and articles on various topics related to energy and environment, also in peer-reviewed scientific journals.[2]
Nuclear energy study
[edit]He is best known for the paper Nuclear power the energy balance that he wrote with Philip Smith (also named Stormsmith studies), where they analyzed the energy payback from the entire nuclear power system. The energy inputs were calculated based on various assumptions and guesses about the technologies used in uranium production, rather than actually measuring them. They concluded that the major parameter determining the energy balance was the grade of the uranium ore, and ore grades lower than 180 ppm do not yield an energy gain when used in the nuclear fuel cycle.[3]
The study was heavily criticized, such as a rebuttal by researchers from the Paul Scherrer Institute.[4] With further criticism from Sevior and Flitney who issued the following statement:[5][6]
We compared the predicted energy cost [using Storm van Leeuwen's study[3]] of Uranium mining and milling for Ranger, Olympic Dam and Rössing to the energy consumption as reported. All are significantly over predicted (5 PJ, 60 PJ and 69 PJ vs 0.8 PJ, 5 PJ and 1 PJ respectively). [...]
The energy consumption is predicted to be so large that is comparable to the energy consumption of a particular sub-section of the economy. In the case of Rössing, the over prediction is larger than the energy consumption of the entire country of Namibia.
Storm van Leeuwen noted that :
The method of Sevior and Flitney based on financial data appears to me full of hidden assumptions, bookkeeping problems, statistical pitfalls[broken anchor] and uncertainties.
The paper has been used by anti-nuclear organizations to claim that nuclear power is not clean enough to be considered a part of a clean energy mix.[7]
Other papers
[edit]Storm van Leeuwen also presented his previous work as part of another non-peer reviewed controversial paper "Secure Energy? Civil Nuclear Power, Security and Global Warming",[8] published by a think tank, the Oxford Research Group, an institute unaffiliated with Oxford University, in which it argues nuclear power is not a long-term reducer of greenhouse gas emissions.[9]
His original results has been used in a study[10] - Life cycle energy and greenhouse gas emissions of nuclear energy: A review. Energy Conversion and Management - with several modifications.
Storm van Leeuwen is recognized by Open Democracy as one of their notable authors.[11]
Personal life
[edit]Storm van Leeuwen lives in Chaam with his wife, the artist Pien Storm van Leeuwen.
See also
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ Charles Barton, David Fleming and Jan Willem Storm van Leeuwen
- ^ Jan Willem Storm van Leeuwen (1985). "Nuclear uncertainties: Energy loans for fission power". Energy Policy: 253–266. doi:10.1016/0301-4215(85)90158-2.
- ^ a b Jan Willem Storm van Leeuwen; Philip Smith (30 July 2005). "Nuclear Energy: the Energy Balance" (PDF). Retrieved 2008-01-18.
- ^ http://gabe.web.psi.ch/pdfs/Critical%20note%20GHG%20PSI.pdf Dones, Roberto, 2007. Critical note on the estimation by storm van Leeuwen J.W. and Smith P. of the energy uses and corresponding CO2 emissions from the complete nuclear energy chain. Paul Scherrer Institute Policy Report, April |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111011225201/http://gabe.web.psi.ch/pdfs/Critical%20note%20GHG%20PSI.pdf |archive-date=10 Oct 2011 |url-status=dead
- ^ Martin Sevior (2006-06-02). "Response from Martin Sevior to rebuttal 2 from Jan Willem Storm van Leeuwen". Retrieved 2009-12-06.
- ^ "Energy Analysis of Power Systems". World Nuclear Association. March 2006. Archived from the original on 2013-02-15. Retrieved 2008-04-30.
- ^ David Fleming (April 2006). "Why Nuclear Power Cannot be a Major Energy Source". Retrieved 2009-12-06.
- ^ Frank Barnaby, Keith Barnham, James Kemp, Paul Rogers, Jan Willem Storm van Leeuwen (March 2007). Secure Energy? Civil Nuclear Power, Security and Global Warming. Oxford Research Group (ORG), UK. p. 56. ISBN 978-0-9552846-1-8. Retrieved 2008-04-26.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ Moira Herbst (2007-03-26). "New Debate Over Nuclear Option". Business Week. Archived from the original on 2008-03-02. Retrieved 2008-04-26.
- ^
Lenzen, M. (2008). "Life cycle energy and greenhouse gas emissions of nuclear energy: A review. Energy Conversion and Management" (PDF). University of Sydney. p. 69. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-09-03. Retrieved 2013-11-08.
Frank Barnaby, James Kemp and others
- ^ "Author Jan Willem Storm van Leeuwen". OpenDemocracy. Archived from the original on 2008-07-05. Retrieved 2008-04-26.
Further reading
[edit]- "The real cost of power". The Times. 2007-11-24. Archived from the original on 2009-06-01. Retrieved 2008-04-26.
- Julio Godoy (2007-04-19). "Divisions Surface Over Nuclear Option". Inter Press Services. Archived from the original on 2008-03-12. Retrieved 2008-04-26.
- Helen Caldicott; Nikolas D. Kristof (September 2005). "Nuclear Reactions - Nuclear Power for electricity generation keeps generating heated debate..." (PDF). IAEA. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2008-10-12. Retrieved 2008-04-26.