Cost overruns of almost $1 billion — so far — at Ga. nuke reactors
Last month, a consortium of utilities including Atlanta-based Southern Company announced cost overruns of almost $1 billion at two new nuclear reactors being built near Waynesboro.
That’s an arresting number under any circumstances, but it looms even larger when you realize that major construction on the Vogtle 3 and 4 reactors has basically just begun, with at least five more years of construction to come.
And if costs soar, who’s going to pay for it? Southern Company and its subsidiary, Georgia Power, own 45.7 percent of the project, so its ratepayers’ share of these recent overruns would come to more than $400 million. But according to Buzz Miller, Southern’s executive vice president of nuclear development, that cost will be borne by contractors who are building the project.
“Our official position is that there’s no way we’re going to pay that amount,” Miller said Tuesday.
William Jacobs, a nuclear expert appointed by the Georgia Public Service Commission to monitor construction at Vogtle, warns that additional problems may be coming. In his latest report, he writes that the project is already more than seven months behind schedule, engineering work is not being completed on time, critical components may be delayed and additional potential change orders “could significantly impact” construction costs. Quality assurance issues from major suppliers “continue to be a significant concern for the project.”
In addition, he warns, project owners have yet to agree with contractors on a long-term construction schedule.
“The project is being managed based on short-term forecasts showing work to be accomplished in the next 60 to 90 days,” Jacobs writes. “A first-of-a-kind project of this magnitude and complexity cannot be effectively or efficiently managed using 60-to-90-day forecasts.”
A lot is at stake in the Vogtle project. The new breed of reactors being built at the site — featuring advanced standardized design, streamlined licensing and new construction techniques — are supposed to keep costs steady and bring projects in close to budget and on schedule. That in turn is supposed to spur a new golden era for nuclear power.
However, the problems at Vogtle are not isolated. Two new reactors just under construction in South Carolina, using the identical technology as at Vogtle, are already $560 million over initial estimates and counting. And in Tennessee, efforts to complete a nuclear plant abandoned back in the 1980s have almost doubled in cost. Originally scheduled to accept nuclear material in April, the Tennessee Valley Authority reactor is now expected to go on line late in 2015 at the earliest. And TVA executives acknowledge that the fault is largely their own.
As Miller points out, some of the problems at Vogtle and in the South Carolina project are inherent in being pioneers in construction of a new generation of plants. Since no new nuclear power plants have been built in this country in three decades or longer, suppliers and contractors face a challenge in ramping up to meet the exacting standards required in nuclear construction.
However, S. David Freeman, a former chairman of TVA, warned the TVA board last month that the problems may be inescapable.
“Maybe the problem is in the technology,” he was quoted as saying. “Maybe nuclear power is just such a demanding technology it requires near perfection. It requires so many people to always do the right thing. It just inherently is going to have cost overruns.”
That’s been the challenge of nuclear power from the beginning. Done right — absolutely right — it has great potential as a source of energy, especially in a global climate that is showing every sign of warming, just as scientists have warned. But as we’ve seen, the consequences of doing it wrong can be enormous in financial terms and more importantly in environmental terms.
Theoretically, we know how to handle it. At least we think we do. But it’s a technology in which very small mistakes can have very large repercussions, and when human beings are involved, there is always a significant danger that confidence will outrun competence.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
367 comments Add your comment
godless heathen
June 6th, 2012
12:31 pm
Granny (aka Chicken Little) forgot to even mention the Tybee Island H bomb.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18587608
stands for decibels
June 6th, 2012
12:32 pm
pulling their chestnuts out of the fire and cleaning up behind them…
Perhaps (and I’m being rather charitable here–we didn’t do those military operations out of the collective goodness of our lil’ hearts after all) but that’s hell and gone from “stabbing us in the back,” as had been asserted.
Paul
June 6th, 2012
12:33 pm
Peadawg
“Meetings and work…”
But it’s been so long since we’ve heard how you’re the only one here who has a job and the rest of us just sit around and blog all day -
Paul
June 6th, 2012
12:35 pm
sfd
Have you noticed? The Socialism started in this country when people started calling them French Fries instead of Freedom Fries?
Jm
June 6th, 2012
12:36 pm
Curious
U may b right
RB from Gwinnett
June 6th, 2012
12:37 pm
Where was all this liberal outrage when the Obamacare cost projections were increased?
If you cared as much about the massive cost overrun Washington has become we would all be a lot better off.
Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette
June 6th, 2012
12:38 pm
UNCLE SAMANTHA
June 6th, 2012
11:37 am
WHICH CAME FIRST?
Granny Godzilla – Union Thugette ……… OR …………….Chicken Little
What ain’t that a zinger!
I’ll weep into my pillow tonight….
tee hee hee
godless heathen
June 6th, 2012
12:38 pm
josef,
I’m very familiar with the Charleston and New Madrid Earthquakes. Seismic hazard maps are drawn based on the earthquakes at these locations although no-one has any friggin idea what the frequency of recurrence is (That’s an engineer mentality).
If you go to the NRC and review the permit applications for Plant Vogtle, they probably have a couple of pages in their evaluating seismic risk.
stands for decibels
June 6th, 2012
12:39 pm
The Socialism started in this country when people started calling them French Fries instead of Freedom Fries?
You’ve gone and prompted a Deep Thought:
Normally I’m not OK with whitewashing facts out of the history books, but in the case of the Freedom Fries, maybe that’d be acceptable. I really don’t future generations to know we were ever quite that eaten up with Teh Stoopid as we were.
skipper
June 6th, 2012
12:39 pm
First, folks subscribed to the dirty coal info, so coal is basically going to be discontinued….now nukes…..what do you want? I know; burn Al Gore’s fat a$$…..that’ll keep us going a few years!
getalife
June 6th, 2012
12:41 pm
Paul,
They just need to call France and let them build it like sam said.
That was hilarious.
godless heathen
June 6th, 2012
12:41 pm
“there”, gh, not “their”
http://learnyourdamnhomophones.com/
Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette
June 6th, 2012
12:41 pm
Union
You could answer them seven ways to Sunday…they remain accidents with nukes in the military.
No wonder you can’t find the time.
Paul
June 6th, 2012
12:43 pm
sfd
Maybe we should rename them “If Only We’d listened to the French We Wouldn’t Have Gotten Fried” Fries?
getalife
June 6th, 2012
12:44 pm
Solyndra.
Repeat over and over and over……..
Jm
June 6th, 2012
12:45 pm
Fries r bad
Freedom or French
getalife
June 6th, 2012
12:46 pm
The gop spent 60 million on a recall election.
Talk about waste.
Jm
June 6th, 2012
12:46 pm
Bloomberg will ban fries
Jefferson
June 6th, 2012
12:46 pm
Give the CEO a raise, that will fix it.
Carole
June 6th, 2012
12:46 pm
What’s interesting is people opposed to building the reactors brought this up time and time again. And they had history on their side–the last time reactors were built. I’m almost sure that when this issue was brought before the Public Service Commission they gave Georgia Power a pass on shareholders bearing the brunt of the cost overruns. That means it’s me and you fellow taxpayers.
getalife
June 6th, 2012
12:47 pm
jm,
Now you are supporting our First Lady’s efforts on obesity?
Jm
June 6th, 2012
12:47 pm
60 million
Stimulus
TM
June 6th, 2012
12:48 pm
I seem to recall an article in this paper claiming the Mayor of Atlanta’s pants were on fire when he claimed the new terminal at the airport came in on budget. Turns out it was $700 million more than the orginal budget. Who is going to pay for that?
Jm
June 6th, 2012
12:48 pm
Getalife
Always have
The Daily Lie
June 6th, 2012
12:49 pm
today, brought to you by RB at 12:37. Do tell, when were the projections for the ACA increased? Be careful, the lie has been exposed many times on this blog already….
getalife
June 6th, 2012
12:49 pm
No raise for the CEO just a huge bonus.
Then more tax cuts and deregulating the industry stat.
stands for decibels
June 6th, 2012
12:50 pm
Paul @ 12.43, contrary to my dumb assertion @ 12.39–well, I clicked one of the story links from that wiki page about a dimly recalled denouement to that whole thing, and felt some of the old feelings from those days, especially reading some of the quoted comments from the sadder-but-wiser congressman …
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/may/25/usa.jamiewilson1
Walter Jones, the Republican congressman for North Carolina who was also the brains behind french toast becoming freedom toast in Capitol Hill restaurants, told a local newspaper the US went to war “with no justification”.
[...]
Although he voted for the war, he has since become one of its most vociferous opponents on Capitol Hill, where the hallway outside his office is lined with photographs of the “faces of the fallen”.
“If we were given misinformation intentionally by people in this administration, to commit the authority to send boys, and in some instances girls, to go into Iraq, that is wrong,” he told the newspaper. “Congress must be told the truth.”
We should never stop learning, even when it’s painful to recollect.
getalife
June 6th, 2012
12:51 pm
Tell that to your fat con friends jm.
Good luck with that.
Jim163
June 6th, 2012
12:51 pm
There once was a time in this country when we could build things under budget and ahead of schedule, all one has to do is to tour the Hoover Dam or visit the Golden Gate bridge to be reminded of this. It is not only the power plants, it’s the new bay bridge as well. We have lost our engineering prowess and let the government meddle to much into these projects. We should have sub-contracted out to the French.
Energy production costs by technology. Solar is a very long way off.
http://nuclearfissionary.com/2010/04/02/comparing-energy-costs-of-nuclear-coal-gas-wind-and-solar/
jm
June 6th, 2012
12:53 pm
“Tell that to your fat con friends jm.”
My best con friend is in good shape. I am not a con tho.
stands for decibels
June 6th, 2012
12:54 pm
Fries r bad
mon ami…potatoes that you slice and deep-fry yourself as a side dish with a balanced meal are a delicious thing, actually.
But extruded potato product fried, (over-)salted, jammed into bags and sold with high-fat/low fiber garbage that’s eaten while driving from one place to another? Something else again.
jm
June 6th, 2012
12:54 pm
school lunches should definitely be healthier
good job michelle
zeke
June 6th, 2012
12:54 pm
must have had really bad cost estimators or they did it on purpose to suck votes for projects in.
what has gone up in prices? not labor….materials maybe, caused by specualators my guess…or competition with china growth..
in any event, yea let’s build nuclear reactors on the cheap…yea that’s the ticket
Williebkind
June 6th, 2012
12:55 pm
Well, are these plants being built by union labor? Now that could answer a lot of questions about costs.
ZoSo
June 6th, 2012
12:56 pm
RB @ 12:37 is correct. From the CBO:
President Obama’s landmark healthcare overhaul is projected to cost $1.76 trillion over a decade, reports the Congressional Budget Office, a hefty sum more than the $940 billion estimated when the healthcare legislation was signed into law. To put it mildly, ObamaCare’s projected net worth is far off from its original estimate — in fact, about $820 billion off.
jm
June 6th, 2012
12:56 pm
“mon ami”
really? I’m flattered. I could’ve sworn we were arch enemies.
Tu mange le pommes frites francaise aussi?
jm
June 6th, 2012
12:57 pm
“must have had really bad cost estimators”
they always underestimate inflation.
blame the Fed in part.
zeke
June 6th, 2012
12:57 pm
by the way, can you see some underpaid smuck at psc trying to analyze utility companies that can hire the best and more of them….let’s blame govt
Aquagirl
June 6th, 2012
12:58 pm
Energy production costs by technology. Solar is a very long way off.
Well, maybe if we made a massive government effort like we did with nuclear, solar would be more viable. Or did you think all those scientists at Oak Ridge were working for private corporations?
larry
June 6th, 2012
12:58 pm
There once was a time in this country when we could build things under budget and ahead of schedule, all one has to do is to tour the Hoover Dam or visit the Golden Gate bridge to be reminded of this.
We let the government meddle to much into these projects? Who do you think built the Hoover Dam or the Golden Gate bridge?
The Daily Lie
June 6th, 2012
12:58 pm
You too, ZoSo? Check again.
ZoSo
June 6th, 2012
12:59 pm
the truth will set you free Mr. Daily
http://news.yahoo.com/cbo-obamacare-price-tag-shifts-940-billion-1-163500655.html
Ivan
June 6th, 2012
1:00 pm
Topics like this really entertain me.
It’s about the only time you get to see the left pretending like they care about deficits and overspending.
jm
June 6th, 2012
1:00 pm
“Well, maybe if we made a massive government effort like we did with nuclear, solar would be more viable.”
Solar subsidies are already in the 10s of billions of federal dollars in subsidies every year.
larry
June 6th, 2012
1:00 pm
Solar is a very long way off.
Not as much as you might think. I plan on putting panels up on the next house i buy.
stands for decibels
June 6th, 2012
1:02 pm
Tu mange le pommes frites francaise aussi?
Who you callin’ a pu$4y! oh, wait.
Gotta run awhile, back later, maybe.
Paul
June 6th, 2012
1:02 pm
sfd
I had not heard that. I give Congressman Jones a great deal of credit for honesty and humility.
Ivan
June 6th, 2012
1:02 pm
“Well, maybe if we made a massive government effort like we did with nuclear, solar would be more viable”
Nuclear can drive a submarine. Solar can barely drive a calculator.
Williebkind
June 6th, 2012
1:03 pm
Well, we could go green. You know cut down thousands of acres of trees and condemn huge fields of cropland to install solar panels. Or, we could build more dams, or no, not that, not use coal….omg. The earth would just die! Maybe thats people that would die. Oh well, we have killed millions of human beings in the past decade anyway. I guess it is time to kill off a few adults so the rest can live. Just remember to buckle up your dog.
Doggone/GA
June 6th, 2012
1:03 pm
“in any event, yea let’s build nuclear reactors on the cheap…yea that’s the ticket”
What else do you think you’ll get when contracts are awarded to the LOWEST bidder?
JamVet
June 6th, 2012
1:03 pm
Well, are these plants being built by union labor? Now that could answer a lot of questions about costs.
Of course.
Even if they are really dumb, completely off-base questions.
The Daily Lie
June 6th, 2012
1:03 pm
The two decades being “compared” are not the same decade…..different starting points. The initial estimate includede the first few years that had lower costs. The second estimate looks at a a 10 year period in which full costs and participation is in place.
zeke
June 6th, 2012
1:04 pm
jm, what inflation…they did not raise my social security check for couple of years then finally a 3.6%
if an estimator missed on inflation rate……how much could they miss it? was there abacus broken?
Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette
June 6th, 2012
1:04 pm
ZoSo
Because I do truly want you to be free….
From the National Review via Media Matters:
On the National Review Online blog The Corner, Patrick Brennan, who describes the law as a “Brobdingnagian bureaucracy” with “fishy accounting” explained:
This claim, that the CBO’s 2012 estimate suggests Obamacare will cost twice as much as originally projected when the bill was passed in 2010, has been widely trumpeted, by some rather doggedly, as another Obamacare failure, but unfortunately, it’s entirely dishonest accounting, as a range of liberal bloggers have pointed out.
Here’s why: The gross costs of Obamacare’s insurance coverage in the CBO’s 2010-2019 estimate were indeed $940 billion (table 2, page 2, here). The updated estimate covers the years 2012-2022, in which the gross costs will be $1.76 trillion, which is, yes, almost double the other number (table 2, here). But these numbers aren’t remotely comparable.
[...]
Pretending that the $940 billion number has been revised to $1.76 trillion is like comparing Tom Brady’s first through eighth seasons in the NFL with his third through eleventh (though probably only Paul Krugman thinks of government spending as a touchdown pass). Gross costs in each year haven’t really changed — e.g., in 2019, the old, 2010 estimate predicted a gross cost of $216 billion, the new estimate is $224 billion (the net costs of coverage have consistently decreased from the old estimate to the new — in 2019, say, from $175 billion to $149 billion).
Williebkind
June 6th, 2012
1:05 pm
“It’s about the only time you get to see the left pretending like they care about deficits and overspending.”
And its poor acting at that.
skipper
June 6th, 2012
1:05 pm
Al Gore, it often is said,
says global warming is his dread.
Lets forget coal and gas,
and burn his fat a$$,
enough energy to light up the TED!
(Thats Turner field for you non-sports folks!)
godless heathen
June 6th, 2012
1:05 pm
““Maybe the problem is in the technology,” he was quoted as saying. “Maybe nuclear power is just such a demanding technology it requires near perfection. It requires so many people to always do the right thing. It just inherently is going to have cost overruns.” ”
Anyone that’s been involved in the construction of a nuclear facility can tell you that one reason that they are so expensive to construct is the mentality that everything has to be “near perfection”, even if it doesn’t really need to be. The guard shack at the gate will cost as much as a 20 room mansion, “because it’s at a nuclear facility”. It’s like government work squared.
Union
June 6th, 2012
1:07 pm
Granny Godzilla – Union Thugette
June 6th, 2012
12:41 pm
ok.. lib logic.. makes sense.. there are a lot more of those types of incidents on gse types of vessels.. i can find articles where kids had accidents with electricity, got shot in schools, ate too much and got fat.. maybe all of those things are dangerous as well..
ships going in and out of the alameda station would always be met by protesters screaming no nukes, etc. in 1989 after the earthquake, the navy moved a ship pier side in san fran to supply emergency power during the rescue effort.. from its nuclear reactors.. dont think those protesters were out there then?
Jay
June 6th, 2012
1:08 pm
“President Obama’s landmark healthcare overhaul is projected to cost $1.76 trillion over a decade, reports the Congressional Budget Office, a hefty sum more than the $940 billion estimated when the healthcare legislation was signed into law. To put it mildly, ObamaCare’s projected net worth is far off from its original estimate — in fact, about $820 billion off.”
ZoSo, that is absolutely false. The alleged “increase” is due entirely to the fact that the original 10-year cost estimate covered several years in which ObamaCare was not yet implemented. The later 10-year estimate included additional years in which it would be in full effect.
That’s the entire difference in those estimates, and it is grossly dishonest to suggest otherwise.
Aquagirl
June 6th, 2012
1:08 pm
Solar subsidies are already in the 10s of billions of federal dollars in subsidies every year.
Most subsidies are in the form of various tax credits for installing panels and so forth. We don’t spend that much to develop the technology, because the Blessed Free Market(tm) is supposed to magically bring about rapid advances.
ZoSo
June 6th, 2012
1:09 pm
Media Matters? Paul Krugman?
Please.
zeke
June 6th, 2012
1:10 pm
like they care about facts
skipper
June 6th, 2012
1:10 pm
Jay,
“Grossly dishonest!” Thats rough on somebody, and not even a cuss word!
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
June 6th, 2012
1:10 pm
JamVet:
“Used to be ………. greatly improved and getting better.
More misinformation from the Master.
Clean coal does not exist except in the GOP’s Hope & Change talking points.”
“Clean coal technology is a collection of technologies being developed to reduce the environmental impact of coal energy generation.[1] When coal is used as a fuel source, the gaseous emmissions generated by the thermal decomposition of the coal, include sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, carbon dioxide, and other chemical byproducts that vary depending of the type of the coal being used. These emissions have been established to have a negative impact on the environment, contributing to acid rain or climate change. As a result, clean coal technologies are being developed to remove or reduce pollutant emissions to the atmosphere. Some of the techniques that would be used to accomplish this include chemically washing minerals and impurities from the coal, gasification (see also IGCC), treating the flue gases with steam to remove sulfur dioxide, carbon capture and storage technologies to capture the carbon dioxide from the flue gas and dewatering lower rank coals (brown coals) to improve the calorific value, and thus the efficiency of the conversion into electricity.
The world’s first “clean coal” power plant went on-line in September 2008 in Spremberg, Germany. The plant is owned by the Swedish company Vattenfall and has been built by the german firm Siemens.[10] The plant is called Schwarze Pumpe power station. The facility captures CO2 and acid rain producing sulfides, separates them, and compresses the CO2 into a liquid. Plans are to inject the CO2 into depleted natural gas fields or other geological formations. This technology is considered not to be a final solution for CO2 reduction in the atmosphere, but provides an achievable solution in the near term while more desirable alternative solutions to power generation can be made economically practical.[10]”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_coal_technology
Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette
June 6th, 2012
1:11 pm
Union
Again….accidents with nukes…..
However if we could harness the spinning of your wheels right now we could forget about energy worries.
Why is it so damn hard to get a “typical con” to admit he was wrong?
CJ
June 6th, 2012
1:11 pm
RE: “Maybe nuclear power is just such a demanding technology it requires near perfection. It requires so many people to always do the right thing. It just inherently is going to have cost overruns.”
This is the former chairman of the TVA passing the buck. There are no “inherent” cost overruns. This is an example of bad management.
In addition, if project managers had done their jobs, construction and purchase agreements would include provisions such that loses arising out of cost overruns would be borne by the vendors and service providers. Without such provisions, vendors are free to low-ball to get the business with the intention of collecting more later.
Doggone/GA
June 6th, 2012
1:11 pm
“Solar can barely drive a calculator”
It’s obvious you haven’t kept up with the current solar technology.
ZoSo
June 6th, 2012
1:12 pm
Jay,
I did not suggest it, the CBO did. Call them a liar if you must. So you don’t think the costs aren’t going to explode? I will take the CBO numbers over left wing spin any day of the week.
godless heathen
June 6th, 2012
1:12 pm
What else do you think you’ll get when contracts are awarded to the LOWEST bidder?
Doggone, You’re a fan of Cost Plus contracts now?
Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette
June 6th, 2012
1:13 pm
ZoSo
Are you admitting to the entire blog you don’t know what the NATIONAL REVIEW is?
I know this has been said before, but there really should be a childrens/LIV blog.
zeke
June 6th, 2012
1:14 pm
dod likies cost plus and private contractors (&congressmen) too
Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette
June 6th, 2012
1:14 pm
Left wing spin from the NATIONAL REVIEW????
Holy Cow.
Common Sense isn't very Common
June 6th, 2012
1:14 pm
0311
I knew there had been many advances in coal fired plants, but that is amazing And well worth looking into as one of the alternatives for the future.
jm
June 6th, 2012
1:16 pm
zeke
yes, the inflation calculator is broken.
people build in 2-3% inflation in their cost estimates because that’s what they hear the costs are.
however, inflation after ignoring “quality improvements” (which are irrelevant to the ultimate cost of the project’s initial cost) is more like 5-6%
Blame BEA and the Fed.
ZoSo
June 6th, 2012
1:16 pm
Granny do you know that the CBO is bipartisan? Get your head out of your…………
Never mind..
going back to work
TaxPayer
June 6th, 2012
1:17 pm
Perhaps the “amused” right wingers will be so kind as to share with us some details regarding the yearly debt reductions contained in the Paul Ryan budget proposal. Also, please feel free to share with us what the projected debt ceiling would need to be for said budget. I await your reply. zzzzzz
jm
June 6th, 2012
1:18 pm
news you can use
Former presidential aides Karl Rove and Robert Gibbs said at the WINDPOWER 2012 Conference & Exhibition in Atlanta that there was bipartisan political support for renewing the wind energy production tax credit but Congressional action was unlikely before the November election, the Associated Press reported. Karl Rove, advisor to former President George W. Bush, was quoted as saying: “My hope is that after the election people say, ‘Look, let’s start making some priorities and find some things that we can agree on, and maybe one of them is the Production Tax Credit. It is a market mechanism, you don’t get paid unless you produce the power, and we’re not picking winners and losers, we’re simply saying for some period of time we will provide this incentive.”
Gibbs, former press secretary for President Obama, was quoted as saying: “The policy is airtight. We understand the jobs it produces, we understand the impact it has on our energy portfolio, and quite frankly there’s no reason we shouldn’t do it.” The Atlanta Journal-Constitution quoted Gibbs as saying: “We cannot have this yo-yo tax policy where one year it’s there, one year it might not be. Your manufacturers and your people are placing orders, you’re making those hiring and firing decisions now.” Gibbs said he expected at least 280 members of Congress to vote yes when the production tax credit came up for consideration.
zeke
June 6th, 2012
1:18 pm
jm, so what components drive inflation in nuclear plants…..is it labor or materials
Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette
June 6th, 2012
1:18 pm
Zo So
National review….left wing spin…screen cleaner…
Oh and since you’re going back to work…can you get us all a Frosty?
Common Sense isn't very Common
June 6th, 2012
1:19 pm
Maybe Ga can put the land around the nuke plant to good use and build an oil refinery there
TaxPayer
June 6th, 2012
1:20 pm
“Clean Coal”
I can’t help but laugh every time I see some misinformed tool post those two words.
zeke
June 6th, 2012
1:20 pm
jm, what are the inflation drivers in nuclear construction….is it more labor or materials and what trade school did the cost estimators graduate (if) from
Doggone/GA
June 6th, 2012
1:20 pm
“Doggone, You’re a fan of Cost Plus contracts now?”
Nope. I’m a fan of monitored and audited bids that are returned to sender if unrealistically low.
zeke
June 6th, 2012
1:21 pm
zoso, cleanup aisle 5
TaxPayer
June 6th, 2012
1:22 pm
I hope Jay is not expecting honesty from a con. That would be just too funny.
The Daily Lie
June 6th, 2012
1:23 pm
I’ve noticed that people’s work schedules get very busy and they must stop blogging right around the time their ignorant posts have been proven to be just that….
They BOTH suck
June 6th, 2012
1:24 pm
“I will take the CBO numbers over left wing spin any day of the week.”
Notthat that I have read where you approved of it, but I take you read the CBO’s numbers on Ryan’s BS budget he was and is attempting to sell to the electorate and you agree it is BS
Fred ™ Being Repressed
June 6th, 2012
1:24 pm
Off Topic Question Of Honesty:
Last night I bought an 18 pack of Coors light frrom Kroger’s. It was SUPPOSED to be $15.99 but rang up for $5.99. I told the girl and she said she had to sell it for what it rang up for. I forgot last night, but I called the manager a few minutes ago and told him. I also told him that I was comibng in few hours to pick up some thing for supper and……. another 18 pack as a test. I said if it ALSO rang up for $5.99 I was going to go back and get everyone he had on the shelf.
Is that wrong? have I given them enough warning to a potential problem? And NO I won’t tell you which Kroger’s lol.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
June 6th, 2012
1:24 pm
Common Sense isn’t very Common :
Thank you.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
June 6th, 2012
1:25 pm
TaxPayer:
I laugh everytime I see “clean Democrat”.
They BOTH suck
June 6th, 2012
1:26 pm
jm
At 1:18. Good post. Please post the link to the article.
Thanks
RB from Gwinnett
June 6th, 2012
1:27 pm
Zoos, Jay is right about the change in years being compared. I guess using several years in which no benefits are being paid to make the number look better is ok with them.
As usual, though, you have to look at what they’re hiding from you. In this case, the actual projection WAS increased from $1.445T to $1.496T. Kay won’t tell you that part of the story because it doesn’t fit his agenda. For those of you keeping score at home, that’s a $51billion dollar increase hidden behind their games with the numbers.
Jay
June 6th, 2012
1:27 pm
ZoSo, the CBO did NOT suggest it. YOU did.
The quote that you seem to attribute to the CBO, for example, did not in any way come from the CBO. I have read their report. Have you?
Here it is:
http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/03-13-Coverage%20Estimates.pdf
Point out where it says what you claim it says.
Peadawg
June 6th, 2012
1:28 pm
Jay
June 6th, 2012
1:08 pm
Who cares how you spin the increased projections. The initial projection, which was spouted by many Democrats including you, Cynthia, Obama, Pelosi, etc. etc. was that it would SAVE money.
Not even close.
JOE COOL~DoWnToWn THUG
June 6th, 2012
1:29 pm
“Is that wrong? have I given them enough warning to a potential problem? And NO I won’t tell you which Kroger’s lol.”
NOPE, not wrong at all. Where you were wrong was not going back THEN and buying the rest and inviting EVERYBODY, even Scout over for a brew.
Matti
June 6th, 2012
1:30 pm
Fred ™ Being Repressed,
The most disturbing part of your story at 1:24 is that you purchased Coors Light! Eww!
Williebkind
June 6th, 2012
1:30 pm
“GG, Oh and since you’re going back to work…can you get us all a Frosty?”
Did you do your daily excercises today?
Doggone/GA
June 6th, 2012
1:32 pm
“Is that wrong?”
Yes. Stealing is stealing.
Williebkind
June 6th, 2012
1:32 pm
“The most disturbing part of your story at 1:24 is that you purchased Coors Light! Eww!”
I was just presented a bottle of homemade wine! I cant wait!
They BOTH suck
June 6th, 2012
1:34 pm
“And NO I won’t tell you which Kroger’s lol.”
Well damn, Fred. I was going to be heading up Briarcliff within a few minutes. I think you mentioned before you live in Tucker or close. I don’t even drink Coors Light, but for 5.99 it would go down just like it tastes,,,,,,,,,,, water