With the leading projects in dissary (sic), why is the Obama administration rushing to put billions on the line to encourage new construction? The industry has been trying to get Uncle Sam to bankroll its comeback for more than a decade. Between 1999 and 2009, the industry poured more than $600 million into lobbying for its cause and spent almost $63 million on campaign contributions, according to a recent analysis from the Investigative Reporting Workshop at American University. Republicans have long championed nuclear power, putting forward legislation that would call for the construction of 100 new nuclear plants in the next two decades. But the nuclear lobby's most ambitious goals were often stymied by Democrats in Congress—until Obama was elected and his administration began the push for (sic) climate bill.
quote: I just moved into a a new condo and replaced all the 60 watt incandescent bulbs with compact fluorescent
quote: By SPOOFE on 6/19/2010 12:10:26 PM , Rating: 0 quote: I just moved into a a new condo and replaced all the 60 watt incandescent bulbs with compact fluorescent Just be sure to call a biohazard team if one breaks, unless you enjoy inhaling mercury vapors. And make sure you recycle 'em after those nine years. Just sayin'.
quote: I saw some Philips brand ones at Home Depot.
quote: What incentive do manufacturers have to lower the price on an item they'll only get to sell to you 2-3 times in your lifetime?
quote: The biggest problem right now is that the government is too involved. Everybody knows if an American company finds better-than-nuclear power source, the government will all but take them over and force them to make the technology available to all. When you take away the rewards for innovations you reduce the desire to innovate.
quote: I call BS. Clean nuclear is a great power technology -- clean, efficient, and cheap -- and the government isn't trying to take it over.
quote: *cough* Cap and Trade *cough*
quote: Cap and Trade doesn't nationalize the nuclear power industry.
quote: The whole point of cap and trade is to allow businesses to do what they do best, innovate and save money.
quote: No the whole point is to lower emissions by 80 percent to achieve a 2 degree reduction in global temperatures. What about this screams innovation, money savings, and free market principles to you?
quote: Ok well I AM saying it isn't perfect, and I'm saying it IS a bad idea. So let me get this right, the Government is essentially giving businesses a straight jacket and then saying "ok now innovate yourself out of this", and that is a good thing for the free market? Only one thing is going to result from this, the consumer getting railed. I don't know any unbiased economist that doesn't see Cap and Trade as being a disaster for this countries economy. Even the goal is absurd. Does anyone really think we can lower global temperatures by 2 degrees without destroying our way of life? Do we even know for a fact that man is increasing global temperatures?
quote: People who hit-and-run with snide comments that are peripherally relevant often have no idea what they're talking about.
quote: Nuclear is a good solution for a couple decades or so, but we can't possibly power the entire nation on fission nuclear power unfortunately.
quote: neither of these have the cfpp of standard diesel
quote: not even geothermal, (needs hot spots, and run out in 30 years)
quote: I do wonder though, isn't lithium toxic? Don't suppose we can just toss those 'green' EVs into the junkyard and dispose of them as it has been done to cars for years.
quote: recovering lithium from the batteries in cars is likely to be profitable and fairly simple
quote: It's not a matter of popularity, it's supply and demand.
quote: What is the country supposed to be powered with? Happy thoughts?
quote: 1) What is the efficiency of geothermal power? From my layman's perspective, cold regions in northern US would benefit little from it unless they have incredibly efficient extraction.
quote: I do not know the costs, but what would it take for geothermal plants to break even or reach profitability? Again, if the realized output doesn't meet its theoretical output from the first question, it'll be a hard sale to anyone in the energy industry.
quote: Geothermal is very geographically dependent and from what I understand if the consumption exceeds the replenish rates, even a renewable geothermal well can be drained. If I recall correctly, geothermal is very dependent on water and location. I think a good example here would be geyser fields in Southwest USA.
quote: I would personally like to see more of a push for Geothermal personally
quote: I was very hopeful for this technology too. Unfortunately, a test site sran into seismic problems - basically injecting the water was causing earthquakes.
quote: A deep hole in the ground versus military grade radioactive waste that nobody knows what to do with.... Which would you choose?
quote: Can't please the enviro-nuts. What is the country supposed to be powered with? Happy thoughts?
quote: Can't please the enviro-nuts.
quote: There are still places that are part of the United States that get a large fraction of their electrical energy from burning oil - Hawaii, Alaska, Guam, Puerto Rico, and even some parts of Florida at certain times during the year.
quote: Additionally, we still use a fair amount of oil in space heating applications that can readily been supplied by inexpensive electric heat pumps and we use oil to drive locomotives that could be powered with electricity.
quote: Fully 6% of the world's oil consumption comes from burning diesel and bunker fuel on board large, ocean going ships. We have been using nuclear energy to propel large, ocean going ships in the US, UK, French, Russian and Chinese navies for many decades. There is no technical reason at all why nuclear energy could not gradually replace oil as the power source for ships
quote: Really, the regulatory/licensing costs are relatively low
quote: For too long have the stupid hippies dominated the airwaves with their crackpot ideas.
quote: I believe governments should give subsidies to environmentally friendly energy production and tax the other kind until technological development enables clean energy to be competitive.
quote: These environuts that are against it are better labelled as envoronuts than liberals.
quote: Had to be another Mick article... What do you have against nuclear?
quote: clearly he has evolved beyond the need to think.