Estonia's nuclear ambitions

There's been talk in the press recently about whether or not Estonia should build it's own nuclear power plant. To me this is an odd questions so I started reading up on it a bit.

Estonia has always been electricity independent thanks to it's abundance of oil shale deposits in the east and the large power plants near Narva which provide more than enough power for the country and even a little left over to sell to neighbors.

In 2013 the EU electricity market opens up and due to the dirty nature of Estonia's electricity generation it will become prohibitively expensive to produce power (they charge a high CO2 tax on oil shale). So Eesti has started looking into alternative methods to get electricity. The past couple of years Eesti Energia has been talking with the Lithuanians about a partnership to build a new plant in Ignelina where there is a plant right now that has to be shut down shortly due to EU regulations. Apparently the negotiations haven't gone so well, the Poles want a large part of the generation and small Eesti may get pushed out of the deal. Eesti has also asked the Finns whether they can be a part of any future projects in the north since Finland has a number of nukes already running, this option doesn't look likely as they are in the process of building a plant and probably won't need a new one anytime soon.

Because none of these partnerships seem to be working the government has decided to investigate whether building their own, small nuke plant would be a good idea. A couple of locations out on the eastern coast have been mentioned and there is talk of taking the CO2 money that they'll be making in the next couple of years and investing it in a plant that will ensure the future of Estonia's electrical independence.

Does Estonia really need to spend the money to build a plant? Are there no other alternatives? It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Post War: A History of Europe Since 1945 - Review

I recently finished reading Tony Judt's excellent book on the history of Europe after WW2. It's a well written overview of the events that shaped modern Europe and describes in detail how the rise of the EU and it's institutions came to be.

It also delves deeply into the conditions and events in Eastern Europe and how they shaped (or failed to shape) the rest of the continent. The first couple of chapters were of particular interest to me, the short period after the war and before the Cold War set in was a precarious time for all of Europe. Security and economic uncertainty was everywhere and a lot of decisions were made with the assumption that Germany could one day rise to threaten the world again.

There were a number of interesting sections that discussed Estonia and its directs neighbors and events that I was either unaware of or found interesting, some of those sections I'll mention here.

Early in the book the author discusses the effects of collective farms and farm quotas on the local populations and how out of touch they were:

The Baltic States, fully incorporated into the Soviet Union itself, were even worse off than the rest of eastern Europe. 1949, kolkhozes in northern Estonia were required to begin grain deliveries even before the harvest had begun, in order to keep in line with Latvia, four hundred kilometers to the south. By 1953 rural conditions in hitherto prosperous Estonia had deteriorated to the point where cows blown over by the wind were too weak to get back on their feet unaided.

Another section that discussed Sweden and the successful social democratic model they employed also mentions various eugenics programs (attempts at racial improvement that usually involved sterilization) that were by run by Uppsala university. I had no idea that such programs existed and continued to exist until 1976.

The chapter on the 1960's discusses some of the reforms that Krushchev tried to undertake, one of which was a small attempt at private farms which apparently worked a little too well.

"By the early sixties, the 3 percent of cultivated soil in private hands was yielding over a third of the Soviet Union's agricultural output."

When discussing centralized planning in East Germany there are some comedic references to the strict nature of quotas that existed.

"It was announced that Book-holdings in the libraries are to be increased from 350k to 450k volumes. The number of borrowings is to be increased 108.2 percent".

In the section about the creation of a common EU currency the author mentions how Germany pushed hard for stringent rules to ensure that the new currency would mimic the policies of the old Deutchmark. This is of particular interest for Eesti as they have been unable to meet the criteria to join the Euro zone simply because inflation grew as the economy heated up.

"The German negotiators - wary of the profligate tendencies of 'Club Med' countries like Italy or Spain - imposed draconian conditions for membership of the new currency."

Overall I thought the book was one of the most readable history books I've read and provided me with a good base for understanding a lot of current EU (and Russian) issues. So if you're looking for a nice 800+ page book to cozy up with next to the fireplace on a wintery night I highly recommend it.

Pet Peeve

Can someone explain to me why such a large bottle is needed for such small pills?

I know that the probably only make 1 or 2 sizes of bottles to accommodate the largest size pills but really, this is a waste of packaging.

Skype vs. Scrabulous

Scrabulous is the popular Facebook application that got into trouble for ripping off the original Scrabble game.

It appears that they also have a strikingy similar logo to Skype. :)