Obama announces $8 billion to guarantee Ga. nuke plant construction

UPDATE: Obama tried to cast today’s announcement as an outreach to Republicans and an effort to demonstrate compromise.

“Even when we have differences, we cannot allow those differences to prevent us from making progress. On an issue that affects our economy, our security, and the future of our planet, we can’t keep on being mired in the same old stale debates between the left and the right, between environmentalists and entrepreneurs.”

The project is also likely to be a boost to the Georgia economy. Southern Company says it will create about 3,000 construction jobs and permanently employ 850 people. So it’s no surprise that the decision was lauded by Sens. Johnny Isakson and Saxby Chambliss in a joint press release.

But as Jim Galloway notes, the word “Obama” appears nowhere in the senators’ seven-paragraph, 392-word joint statement. They just couldn’t bring themselves to say it.

——————————————————————————————

President Obama today announced $8 billion in federal loan guarantees to help Southern Co. build two nuclear reactors near Augusta. They would be the first new nuclear plants built in this country in almost three decades.

During the 2008 campaign, Obama backed nuclear power as a necessary part of a strategy to fight global warming and reduce carbon emissions. As president, he has proposed increasing loan guarantees for nuclear plant construction from $18.5 billion to $54 billion in such subsidies.

As the Wall Street Journal reported:

“Investing in nuclear energy remains a necessary step,” the president said. “And what I hope is that this announcement underscores both our seriousness in meeting the energy challenge — and our willingness to look at this challenge not as a partisan issue, but as a matter far more important than politics….”

Southern Co. Chief Executive David Ratcliffe called the loan guarantee “an important endorsement in the role nuclear power must play in diversifying our nation’s energy mix and helping to curb greenhouse-gas emissions.”

Ratcliffe and Southern Co. walk a conveniently fine line on climate change. The company has invested heavily in coal-burning plants that are a prime source of greenhouse gases, and thus prefers to downplay evidence of mankind’s role in a warmer planet. But as he demonstrated today, Radcliffe’s more than willing to leverage globlal warming fears when it suits his company’s bottom line.

Personally, I came to the conclusion a long time ago that nuclear power would have to be part of any serious effort to address climate change. But I’ve still got serious qualms, in large part because we aren’t being honest with ourselves and each other. For example, if modern nuclear power is such a slam dunk — if the runaway costs have been brought under control, if the technology is now considerably safer — why are private investors so frightened of putting money into the technology?

The marketplace has decided that nuclear power comes with risks that investors aren’t eager to take — that’s why the federal loan guarantees are necessary. Government is doing what business will not, and it’s remarkable to see politicians who ordinarily preach the gospel of market discipline and the evils of government subsidies fall so silent when the issue is nuclear power.

Of course, in their ultimate wisdom Georgia legislators have none of the qualms that Wall Street demonstrates. Last year, they passed a bill at Georgia Power’s request that will force its customers to start paying for the two nuclear plants next year, long before they are projected to start producing power. Legislators refuse to even consider small tax hikes to keep prisons operating, teachers teaching and traffic flowing, but they have no apparent compunction about forcing Georgians to pay more to a private company on what is still a risky bet.

Finally, we still have no safe repository to store nuclear waste for the tens of thousands of years it will take to cool. I think the Yucca Mountain site in Nevada comes as close to a safe site as we’re likely to get , but it isn’t perfect. No site is perfect. But as we do with so many other problems, we’re pushing that decision off to another time, another generation.

297 comments Add your comment

josef nix

February 16th, 2010
5:39 pm

Three Mile Island. Chernobyl.

ty webb

February 16th, 2010
5:39 pm

“But as he demonstrated today, Radcliffe’s more than willing to leverage globlal warming fears when it suits his company’s bottom line.” hmmmm. You mean there’s money to be made off this whole global warmi-uh-climate change thing?

Paul

February 16th, 2010
5:42 pm

And so begins Pres Obama’s break from the farLeft leaders in Congress?

getalife

February 16th, 2010
5:43 pm

Bold move.

Good luck GA.

CNN is reporting the new #2 Taliban commander was released from Gitmo by w.

@@

February 16th, 2010
5:43 pm

Radcliffe’s more than willing to leverage globlal warming fears when it suits his company’s bottom line.

So did Al Gore, but his “plants” failed due to a gas explosion.

getalife

February 16th, 2010
5:45 pm

ty,

duh.

It is a job producer silly.

DoggoneGA

February 16th, 2010
5:45 pm

“Three Mile Island. Chernobyl.”

I think it has as much, or more, to do with thisL “Of the more than 100 reactor construction projects abandoned during the 1980s and 1990s”

http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/15/terminated-reactor-projects-revived/

@@

February 16th, 2010
5:47 pm

Getalife:

On the last thread you called it a green bubble. Wouldn’t wanna be around when a green bubble bursts.

PUuuuuuuuu.

getalife

February 16th, 2010
5:50 pm

@@,

Think of cows passing gas or jobs, baby, jobs.

Kamchak

February 16th, 2010
5:51 pm

The power of a star is used to make steam.

ty webb

February 16th, 2010
5:54 pm

“It is a job producer silly.”

Ah yes. So global warmi-um-climate change is not an entirely bad thing.

jt

February 16th, 2010
5:55 pm

“why are private investors so frightened of putting money into the technology?”

Government regulations.

Jay knows this.

Now the Federalies are involved which means that the proposed nuclear reactors will be less efficient and cost an astronomical amount more.

getalife

February 16th, 2010
5:56 pm

ty,

It could be bigger than the Internet bubble.

They were giving away cars to come to work in Silicon Valley.

The good ole days.

thomas

February 16th, 2010
5:57 pm

Finally, we still have no safe repository to store nuclear waste for the tens of thousands of years it will take to cool. I think the Yucca Mountain site in Nevada comes as close to a safe site as we’re likely to get , but it isn’t perfect. No site is perfect. But as we do with so many other problems, we’re pushing that decision off to another time, another generation.

So was this a bad move by Obama in yur opinion Jay?

Pogo

February 16th, 2010
6:00 pm

Jay, you must have read my post on the previous thread to getalife. The politicians, no matter what party, will address everyting but the “tough stuff” that will impact them during their tenure. Obama is no different. Nuclear power is safe but like everything thing else, there are unpopular facets to that type of energy generation that must be dealt with. These problems are what no nobody wants to face. That is what makes me sick about the non-leaders we have in this country today. I am a conservative and I am sick of not having leadership that is capable of making the un-popular decisions. Yucca’s demise was a purely political call on Obama and Reid’s part. But even Yucca wasn’t the real answer. Re-processing is and let’s bet a beer if any politician will have the political gonads to tackle that. The environmentalists would throw a “hissy fit” even though it is environmentally and economically the best answer for one of the biggest problems for one of the best sources of energy this world has.

josef nix

February 16th, 2010
6:00 pm

I’m not sure how I feel about nuclear plants. I still have a lot of unawered questions from Three Mile Island and Chernobyl and a NIMBY mentality therefrom. Hydroelectric, solar and wind just seem more rationale to me, and, no, that’s not from any “greenie cause.” These are renewable sources and produce no wastes to be disposed of. I realize that the technology is still in its infancy and that nuclear may be necessary as a stop gap, but if we grow dependent on it, then the impetus to develop these other sources is not there and it won’t be done until, G-d forbid, we do have another Chernobyl or Three Mile Island or worse still, some of the waste goes astray…

Lord Help Us

February 16th, 2010
6:00 pm

Well, Back in the day…Georgia Power originally budgeted $680 million to build both units at Plant Vogtle. The final cost (after Bechtel Corp. milked it for about 9 years) was…$10,000,000,000. That’s $10 Billion.

Maybe, with Fed help GA Power can do better…

Jay

February 16th, 2010
6:01 pm

yeah, JT.

We wouldn’t want any blasted government regulation of nuclear plants, now would we?

And Thomas, as to whether this is a good idea …. I’m torn, as I hope the piece reflects. By the way, see the update above. I’m not the only one torn.

Paul

February 16th, 2010
6:01 pm

One more time: Pres Obama shut down Yucca Mountain last year.

Good press conference question: “Mr. President – where you gonna store the stuff?”

Then again, this administration’s known for getting the cart before the horse. Remember how Gitmo was gonna be closed by now? Remember how KSM was gonna have a civilian court trial in Manhattan?

ty webb

February 16th, 2010
6:02 pm

Jay,
why should the two senators from georgia carry obama’s water, when you seem to be doing such a good job at it?

I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm!

February 16th, 2010
6:02 pm

why are private investors so frightened of putting money into the technology?

The cost of government regulatory compliance?

75% I’m guessing.

So obozo expands government again, another freebie for the bureaucracy.

joan

February 16th, 2010
6:03 pm

I think nuclear power is inevitable, although like many, I think it is a little frightening. I thought however that this government had shut down our safe repositories like Yucca Mountain. Maybe I am wrong. And how much will the Georgia taxpayer have to cough up in “matching” or maintenance costs? Is it time to move.

md

February 16th, 2010
6:04 pm

why are private investors so frightened of putting money into the technology?”

Government regulations.

Jay knows this.”

He should, but then why ask the question.

Bet one won’t find too many private investors in refineries right now either.

Or venezuela……

I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm!

February 16th, 2010
6:04 pm

Yes, there are lots of people out there that would never know how to build a nuke plant without the government showing them.

We’re all so stupid.

Paul

February 16th, 2010
6:05 pm

Jay 6:01

What’s a realistic alternative? Given certain assumptions, there aren’t any good ones.

So, hopefully they’ll proceed with a well thought-out plan. Like putting them in areas with a half mile clear barrier surrounding it. Surrounded by electrical fencing and razor wire. A minefield isn’t a bad idea, either.

jt

February 16th, 2010
6:05 pm

“But as Jim Galloway notes, the word “Obama” appears nowhere in the senators’ seven-paragraph, 392-word joint statement. They just couldn’t bring themselves to say it.”

Because it isn’t Obama’s dang money. It’s ours.

professional skeptic

February 16th, 2010
6:06 pm

Legislators refuse to even consider small tax hikes to keep prisons operating, teachers teaching and traffic flowing, but they have no apparent compunction about forcing Georgians to pay more to a private company on what is still a risky bet.

It’s also apparently fine, according to Republicans, for private insurers to raise premiums 39% on Californians — during a recession.

During a recession!! Where’s the Republican outrage?

It would seem there is none — as long as the transfer of wealth goes from the masses and ends up concentrated into the hands of an elite few, all in the name of private enterprise, price hikes during a recession are just peachy keen.

jt

February 16th, 2010
6:06 pm

Buying political points only works with democrats, corrupt businessmen, and dumb republicans.

jt

February 16th, 2010
6:10 pm

yeah, JT.

“We wouldn’t want any blasted government regulation of nuclear plants, now would we? ”

I would actually prefer a private regulatory body over a government union body.
I mean, how did the toyota brake, peanut plants, undie bomber,banking, etc……..work out?

Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)

February 16th, 2010
6:12 pm

Well, I guess I’d better get on here one more time while Sister Dusty is fixing up the stuff that keeps her husband in the bathroom all night.

If it makes for cheap power bills, I’m all for nuke plants, even if I need to turn green the rest of my life. We can dump the waste someplace down the chain, like in Alabama. There ain’t nothing decent ever come out of Alabama except some football players. A few green people there would be a improvement. Us GA rednecks take great pride in being able to say, “At least we ain’t from Alabama.”

But that don’t mean I don’t want us to drill for oil too. Heck, put up an oil derrick in my back yard if you want to. I don’t want more than a couple hundred thousand dollars for the trailer and the bit of land it sets on. And maybe free gas for the rest of my life.

Have a good night everybody.

getalife

February 16th, 2010
6:13 pm

I remember the rock stars like Springsteen on MTV speaking against nuke power.

CNN: What about the waste?

Said there are 120 storage sites in the country.

josef nix

February 16th, 2010
6:14 pm

jt

“Buying political points only works with democrats, corrupt businessmen, and dumb republicans.”

Then this one ought to fly like a kite in March…

Jay

February 16th, 2010
6:16 pm

“A private regulatory body” JT?

Interesting concept. The closest thing I could think of would be those private bond rating companies such as Moodys and Standard & Poors, the ones who rated garbage mortgage securities as AAA investments.

Yeah, let’s put them in charge of nuclear power.

@@

February 16th, 2010
6:16 pm

It’s not like Obama isn’t joined at the hip to environmentalists. So if they stand in his way, does he get to look into his teleprompter and “assure” us all things are moving ahead.

The “things” being politicians and the “head” being taxpayers’ turning.

Does Obama have a plan? If he does, does he know what it is? Does anybody?

I sure as heck don’t.

Lord Help Us

February 16th, 2010
6:23 pm

Jt and Jay…we actually have both currently.

The Nuclear Regulatory Agency (Federal agency kinda like the FAA, you know…) and The Institute of Nuclear Power Operators (INPO) which is funded and organized by the industry.

One has teeth…guess which one?

jt

February 16th, 2010
6:25 pm

Jay-

Point taken. But is Moodys and S&P REALLY private? Are they not tainted?

Anyhow, with the Feds involved, and Isackson and Chambliss smiling like jack-asses, I smell a BOONDOGGLE.

The chinese are building a reactor in Texas with no ill-gotten Obama funds.

Lord Help Us

February 16th, 2010
6:25 pm

Make that Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)…

getalife

February 16th, 2010
6:28 pm

Well, the Southern Company just gave him a few million.

jt

February 16th, 2010
6:29 pm

Lord Help Us

This might be why we have a relatively accident-free nuclear history. Private sector standards.

TMI was not as seroius as everyone claims.

Paul

February 16th, 2010
6:32 pm

jt

Have you a cite for the Tx project?

Lord Help Us

February 16th, 2010
6:36 pm

jt, INPO is more of a best-practices/procedures organization without much in the way of enforcement ability.

Without the NRC, our nuke plants would be run like our airlines would be run without the FAA.

The presence of a Federal Agency that will shut them down if they screw up keeps them honest (as much as possible)…

Nuke plants that are idle are VERY expensive…

jt

February 16th, 2010
6:41 pm

Paul-

Here is your answer. This article claims Toshiba(Japan) but the contractors are Chinese and Koreans. Also, I guess people blame BUSH for getting this started.

It is a national disgrace that Americans ain’t doing this. It is as shameful as having eyetalians building our MARTA trains.

The construction of the new 1350 megawatt nuclear plant was announced in 2007, and the application for a combined construction and operating license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission was filed in November of that year. This application was notable because it was the first application for a new nuclear plant filed in the United States since the Three Mile Island incident in 1979.

An affiliate of Toshiba’s, Toshiba America Nuclear Energy Corp. (TANE), was chosen by the NRG and CPS as the prime contractor in an Engineering, Procurement, and Construction Agreement (EPC). Under the EPC, TANE is compensated on a time-and-materials basis until the federal license is granted, at which time the EPC becomes a lump-sum turnkey arrangement with performance and schedule guarantees. The Japan Steel Works, Ltd. of Hokkaido, Japan, is manufacturing the key large components.

The plans for the new reactors were in part motivated by financial incentives in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 signed into law by President Bush. It provided for loan guarantees for new plant construction, a 1.8¢ per KwH production tax credit for electricity generated by new nuclear plants, and federal insurance for regulatory and litigation delays. All of these incentives were limited in amount and extended only to the first few nuclear plants constructed. STP 3&4 (the proposed new nuclear plant), as the first application filed after the act, is currently a front runner for all incentives.

http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=62a911e2-2f08-419f-b38b-a28f4fefb9ee

josef nix

February 16th, 2010
6:42 pm

JAY

Off topic but in case you’re hanging around…got a new one on the Moderator G-d…see 3:53 downstairs—no need to free it–caused enough stink without it… :-)

jt

February 16th, 2010
6:43 pm

Pay attention to the :federal insurance for regulatory and LITIGATION delays. Maybe that is why no Americans want to touch it.

“a 1.8¢ per KwH production tax credit for electricity generated by new nuclear plants, and federal insurance for regulatory and litigation delays.”

josef nix

February 16th, 2010
6:44 pm

jt
@ 6:29

It’s that word “relatively” that bothers me…

Lord Help Us

February 16th, 2010
6:44 pm

jt, per your 6:29…had the US not overreacted to TMI, we would have many more nuke plants today and be burning a LOT less coal.

Unfortunately, our reaction to TMI was similar to our reaction to 9/11…in many ways we are our own worst enemy…

jt

February 16th, 2010
6:45 pm

Lord Help Us

“The presence of a Federal Agency that will shut them down if they screw up keeps them honest (as much as possible)…”

The market does too. IMHO more so.

Paul

February 16th, 2010
6:46 pm

jt

Thanks. I was aware of the Japanese – I’d guess in this case the credit goes to who has the contract, not to the subs.

I’d also guess the Europeans and Japanese are ahead of us as our nuclear industry was pretty well shut down for years; meanwhile, the Europeans and Japanese forged ahead with new designs. So we hire them.

It’d be the same as if we didn’t have a domestic car industry for a couple decades, then decided we wanted to build cars again. We’d call in the folks who know what they’re doing.

Jess

February 16th, 2010
6:47 pm

“But as we do with so many other problems, we’ll push that off to another time and another generation.”

Much like Obama is doing with his large appetite for entitlements, and his small income. I think a lot of people think this idea of passing our debts to the next generation is a talking point, but I assure you everyone I know takes it very seriously.

Bosch

February 16th, 2010
6:48 pm

Isn’t this a good thing? I think so. I’ve always thought that we need a mix of things for energy independence – wind, nuclear, coal, whatever – anything but what comes over from the Saudis, et al.

The waste? Well, yeah, that’s a problem….maybe we could make some waste dump on Mars?

jt

February 16th, 2010
6:49 pm

josef nix -

I hear ya.
And in my searches during the last few minutes, there has been quite a few more incidents than I had initially thought. But,
gas, coal, oil all have their inherent dangers. With today’s technology, there will be no China syndrome.

Heck, the Japanese are building minerature nuke reactors. We shouldn’t be missing out.

Bosch

February 16th, 2010
6:51 pm

Hey Paul – maybe we could shoot the waste towards Caprica!!

Jess

February 16th, 2010
6:52 pm

Jay,

Will these plants be built on the Chattahoochee? If so I assume they will require a lot of water for cooling. I also am fairly certain they woud be put at the top of the pecking order for water because of the safety concerns. Hope the state understands this.

josef nix

February 16th, 2010
6:53 pm

BOSCH–
“…anything but what comes from the Saudis, et al…”
I would agree. We need to get back to the idea of self-sufficiency

I’m not sure just how much in jest your Mars dump was meant, but it’s something to give thought to. I’m not sure how the Martians would feel about it, though!

josef nix

February 16th, 2010
7:01 pm

jt

I went googling, too. Like you, there were more than I thought. I agree with you on the inherent dangers of the other sources as well. I’m not as concerned with a China Syndrome as I am a Three Mile Island or a Chernobyl. I understand the need to look more closely at nuclear as, as I said earlier, a stop gap measure, but I’m not sure we wouldn’t come to rely on it as a primary source, increasing the risks involved. Act in haste, repent in leisure as they say.

Bosch

February 16th, 2010
7:05 pm

josef,

One of those “just joking, not really” kind of things. I’m only concerned with my planet. I’m not very intergalactically PC. :-)

jt

February 16th, 2010
7:13 pm

Here is a nuke plant for 25 million. (chump change for Jay).. 200kw. Delivered to your home by truck. Can power 20,000 homes. On sale NOW, but our government won’t let us have it.

Don’t sweat the enviroment or the future dudes. Entreapenours will take care of it, despite the Federalies.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/nov/09/miniature-nuclear-reactors-los-alamos

I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm!

February 16th, 2010
7:13 pm

CNN poll: 52% say Obama doesn’t deserve reelection in 2012

President Palin, just sayin….

Scout

February 16th, 2010
7:14 pm

I hope he asked Amy Carter what she thought first ………….

My favorite Martian

February 16th, 2010
7:14 pm

You can’t launch radioactive material. the risks are just too great.

We already provide more than half of Georgia’s electricity with nuclear power.

the other half is provided by gerbils and treadmills.

I’m afraid of gerbils.

DoggoneGA

February 16th, 2010
7:14 pm

“TMI was not as seroius as everyone claims”

Yes, it was. Look it up. TMI came VERY close to becoming the first real nuclear melt down. They got lucky. My family got lucky. I come from a very large family, and 95% of my entire family was within the first 3 zones of danger.

Scout

February 16th, 2010
7:17 pm

Headline: “CNN SHOCK POLL: MAJORITY SAY OBAMA DOESN’T DESERVE 2ND TERM !”

Oh, the backlash is coming …………………..

Are You Smarter than a Fourth Grader

February 16th, 2010
7:21 pm

jt,

We can build those nuclear power plants real cheap as long as you don’t mind glowing in the dark. Are you game.

Hillbilly Deluxe

February 16th, 2010
7:21 pm

My feelings on this are mixed as well. We all know there is a risk involved, and even if it’s a remote risk, the results could be pretty diastrous. On the other hand, I feel that acheiving energy independence is or should be one of our highest priorities. We shouldn’t make the “putting all our eggs in one basket” mistake that we’ve made with petroleum. I’d like to see a diversified approach. Solar and wind will work in some areas but not others, same with wave power, ethanol needs to be explored further, as well as some form of methane. Ethanol can be made from lots of things besides corn, if we don’t let it get hijacked again by limited interests as their own private subsidy, like we did this last time. Animal waste can be used, as can gasses from landfills. I think we should explore all these areas and then we could get local or regional solutions that work best for a particular area.

On the subject of a land fill on Mars, (being serious here) why not shoot the nuclear waste into the Sun? It’s already got loads of radiation, so maybe a little more wouldn’t hurt? Of course it might be cost prohibitive, I have no idea on that.

jt

February 16th, 2010
7:24 pm

Are You Smarter than a Fourth Grader -

The waste from one of those plants is only the size of a softball after 7 years.

And then that softball is only dangerous for 5000 years. Geeesh.

DoggoneGA-

Were you there?

DoggoneGA

February 16th, 2010
7:27 pm

“I’m not as concerned with a China Syndrome as I am a Three Mile Island ”

Basically, you’re saying the same thing. If TMI had not been eventually brought under control it would have been the same kind of meltdown as was a danger in that movie. There was, actually, a partial meltdown as it was.

The reason TMI was not as devastating as Chernobyl is because TMI’s reactors are “contained” – Chernobyl was not a contained reactor. So when Chernobyl blew, it blew the roof off the reactor and the radiation escaped directly into the atmosphere, where it was spread by the prevailing winds. Compared to Chernobyl, the release of radioactivity at TMI was minor – but neither was TMI a complete meltdown.

I don’t know if it’s still true, but at the time of Chernobyl, two (I think it was) of the reactors in Georgia were, in fact, uncontained also.

Are You Smarter than a Fourth Grader

February 16th, 2010
7:28 pm

The waste from one of those plants is only the size of a softball after 7 years.

And you can irradiate billions of gallons of water and thousands of acres of land with even less. Would you move yourself and your family next door to an unregulated plant, jt. I ask you, are you game but you do not answer. Instead, you try to deflect.

DoggoneGA

February 16th, 2010
7:33 pm

“Were you there?”

No, we had already moved to Georgia. We had been here something 15 years when TMI happened.

DoggoneGA

February 16th, 2010
7:37 pm

I just checked the map. If we had still been living in PA, in the same house, when TMI happened…we would have only been 10 miles away, as the crow flies.

Jimmy Carter

February 16th, 2010
7:38 pm

“CNN SHOCK POLL: MAJORITY SAY OBAMA DOESN’T DESERVE 2ND TERM ”

This is CNN folks, not Fox. Like rats deserting the sinking ship…..

@@

February 16th, 2010
7:39 pm

Don’t know if anyone mentioned it, but dry-cask storage is the likely choice. There are already 33 states across the nation who have at least one, sometimes more such storage facilities. California is the hostest with the mostest…four in earthquake prone Cali.

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/dry-cask-storage.html

josef nix

February 16th, 2010
7:40 pm

BOSCH
G’Kar and Londo have a message for you!

Doggone–
And I will wager you are better informed than most because it happened in your back yard. Thank you for the clarifications. I make no pretense of being informed to any degree and I must admit that when I said what I did about Three Mile Island, I was falling prey to the Hollywoodization.

Hillbilly–like you, I want to see this process brought down to the local area with local resources at the fore. It’s sort of like that comment you posted by Grady.

DoggoneGA

February 16th, 2010
7:40 pm

“Would you move yourself and your family next door to an unregulated plant”

Well, TMI is not unregulated…but this reminds me of a cousin of mine. She and her husband have a house and land in a very “ritzy” (read expensive) subdivision near the Susquehanna River. But the got their property for well under half what the neighbors on either side of them paid. The reason: if you walk up the hill in their backyard, you have a lovely overlook view of TMI.

As my cousin says, they are in no more, or less, danger then their neighbors, but they got their property cheap because of the view.

DoggoneGA

February 16th, 2010
7:42 pm

“I said what I did about Three Mile Island, I was falling prey to the Hollywoodization”

Well, there’s no doubt that the realease of the China Syndrome only *12* days before TMI happened contributed GREATLY to the over-reaction that led to there having been NO nuclear power plants built since. Coincidence can be VERY frightening, after all.

Jimmy Carter

February 16th, 2010
7:43 pm

While TMI was definitely a wake up call regarding nuclear reactors, let’s not lose sight of the fact that more people were killed at the Chappaquiddick bridge in 1969 than people near TMI in 1979 as a result of the accident. Just sayin……

Bosch

February 16th, 2010
7:43 pm

JC,

I know this is shocking, but CNN hasn’t been exactly Obama friendly since he won. Like Jon Stewart, they like criticizing the POTUS, not matter whose in the seat, in my opinion, of course.

wet wiccan

February 16th, 2010
7:43 pm

It’s not just the danger of an “accident” at a power plant, I know they are supposed to be built to withstand earthquakes and such, but I used to work for an engineering and consulting firm to the nuclear industry that manufactured rail cars to transport spent nuclear fuel to repositories. The moving of spent nuclear waste on rail lines through densely populated areas, the risk of derailment. They did studies on every nuclear plant in the the US and what route would be the least dangerous. Some of the routes could not even use rail lines and were routed on interstates and such.

I would rather see a real push to solar energy. There are some that say that the technology is just not there yet, but isn’t the space station powered by solar energy? The cynic in me says the reason is because they haven’t found a way to put a meter on sunlight and how will they make any money from it?

Bud Wiser

February 16th, 2010
7:46 pm

I guess he forgot to mention he signed last June, I think, for the closing of the Yucca Mt storage facility for nuclear power waste produced, so there’s no place to dump the waste.

Since there is no place to dump the waste, it sort of makes this another porkulus project that will get nowhere….. unless he already sees the handwriting on the wall that he and his gutless party are going over Niagara Falls this November, so the replacements will be there to correct his multitude of errors.

You know, I used to think that Obowo was a deviously cunning socialist, intent on making us the Venezuela-North.

Not so now.

I think he is showing quite strongly that he is is not very smart in the way politics actually works, i.e. -stupid, in fact. Another academia that comes from the mass production factory of “since I cannot do anything at all effectively, I’ll be a politician”. No experience required.

His lack of intelligence there, and limited community organizer skills at best shows the world that he just isn’t up to the job.

Good thing his arrogance doesn’t see or believe that though; he is quite nicely blindly overseeing the destruction of a once proud, but now totally disorganized political party, one that could not get anything done when they had a super majority, no less.

The mushroom heads blame the Repugs as “the party of no”. In a way that was correct… Reid and Pelosi made them the “party of no, we don’t want any of your input”.

Well just lookey here at what a mess the Dimwits have made in their pants now.

DoggoneGA

February 16th, 2010
7:48 pm

“I know they are supposed to be built to withstand earthquakes and such”

yeah, well…let’s hope so. There’s one in California that is built ON two earthquake faults.

http://www.sfbg.com/blogs/politics/2008/11/ca_nuke_plant_on_two_fault_lin.html

I can’t remember any more which plant it was, but one of the last ones built was found to have a serious design flaw…that was caught by those “despised” government inspectors. They found that every water line, every power line, and every safety back-up ALL ran through the same hole in the wall. I won’t swear that’s completely accurate, memory being what it is, but it was something along the lines of being THAT serious.

@@

February 16th, 2010
7:48 pm

No need to get all worked up over this. The enviroweenies will hold it up in litigation for years. That’s what they did at Yucca Mountain. $90 billion sitting idle.

Are You Smarter than a Fourth Grader

February 16th, 2010
7:48 pm

Ahhh yes. Those were the days. I had a friend that worked where these tests were conducted. A sickly looking fellow. The stories he told. The little badges that they wore that let them know when it was too late to care any more. I wonder how he’s doing… if he’s doing.

danjonglee

February 16th, 2010
7:49 pm

I think France has a couple of them…..maybe 60 or so…and produces a majority of their electr….

DoggoneGA

February 16th, 2010
7:50 pm

“I would rather see a real push to solar energy.”

Solar energy has it’s own problems, the main one being that solar plants don’t work at night or in heavily overcast weather. I saw a show about a new solar field being brought online somewhere out west, and they made a pretty strong point of documenting that – at the time the show was filmed – the solar plants customers would still be dependent on conventional power plants at night, because the solar plant designers had not been able to solve the problem of how to store enough power overnight to serve all their customers. And, as far as I know, that’s pretty much true of all solar plants currently online.

josef nix

February 16th, 2010
7:53 pm

“I think France has a couple of them…..maybe 60 or so…and produces a majority of their electr….”

That’s one good argument AGAINST! :-)

JADEN

February 16th, 2010
7:54 pm

josef —- what’s up .

DoggoneGA

February 16th, 2010
7:54 pm

“That’s one good argument AGAINST!”

Nah, that’s easily solved…we’ll just call them “Freedom Nukes” instead of “French Nukes”

Bosch

February 16th, 2010
7:56 pm

I’m mad at the French for winning the Nordic Combination this past weekend. Damn French Nordic Combo skiers.

josef nix

February 16th, 2010
7:57 pm

Doggone–
The arguments you make are valid given the current technology. The same can be said for wind. That is why I think (and G-d I hate this word!) we should be taking a wholistic view. Whether these can be primary or supplemental to the conventional sources depends on the locale and customer base.

josef nix

February 16th, 2010
7:59 pm

jaden
This afternoon and last p.m. it was my “fan base!” :-)

OH, BOY! Less go get them froggy b*stids!

Kamchak

February 16th, 2010
8:02 pm

Bosch

UEFA match on Fox Sport South

Lyon vs. Pretty boy

wet wiccan

February 16th, 2010
8:02 pm

Doggone – We already have the technology for solar power for houses and I think that includes batteries to store power for when it is dark outside. I would like to see something similar to the Rural Electrification Project of the 40s revisited and convert single houses to solar power. It would create a lot of jobs, both in manufacturing the solar panels and installing them. We could start in places where the sun shines most of the time, like Arizona or Florida. Imagine how much our energy consumption could drop just by taking residential houses off the grid.

DoggoneGA

February 16th, 2010
8:02 pm

“we should be taking a wholistic view. ”

Yes, indeed. All forms of energy generation should be improved and used. Then each locality can choose the one, or more, that best suits their local conditions. Georgia would be a good candidate for wind, wave, geothermal, natural gas and nuclear power, and even coal if the technology can be developed to clean up coal. Not so much for solar, I wouldn’t think.

josef nix

February 16th, 2010
8:04 pm

wet wiccan–
That was much of what was going in in my mind…it just makes common sense to me.

JADEN

February 16th, 2010
8:07 pm

josef— you too funny

Scout

February 16th, 2010
8:07 pm

Are You Smarter than a Fourth Grader

February 16th, 2010
8:11 pm

Every option has its pros and cons but conservation is a free for all. LED lighting, thick insulation, energy-saving appliances and more are all a necessary part of our future energy independence.

josef nix

February 16th, 2010
8:11 pm

Scout–
Meanwhile somewhere in Khazhkstan, farmers reported growing 95 kilo cabbages…

Jaden–
Is that funny ha, ha, or funny weird, odd…

DoggoneGA

February 16th, 2010
8:13 pm

“We already have the technology for solar power for houses ”

Not only solar, there’s also individual wind and water power plants as well…and, of course, there’s no reason they can’t be combined in the right circumstances and location.

I think that individual, or neighborhood, plants are well worth looking into…but they aren’t the only answer. Industry is stil going to be dependent on commercial power.

DoggoneGA

February 16th, 2010
8:15 pm

“Every option has its pros and cons but conservation is a free for all. LED lighting, thick insulation, energy-saving appliances”

Errr…things like LEDs, insulation and new appliances hardly constitute FREE energy savings. They generally cost more to buy than conventional devices, and while they will eventually pay themselves off in savings, it could take as much as 10 years or more. The cost is, in fact, why I haven’t gone that route yet. I simply cannot afford the upfront cost of better, but much more expensive, appliances.

JADEN

February 16th, 2010
8:16 pm