Unless you are in favor of $50 billion to $100 billion in federal loan guarantees (that means your tax dollars) for a major expansion of nuclear energy in this country, you should seriously consider signing this petition:
http://www.nrdconline.org/campaign/nrdcaction_110707
or this one:
Nuclear lobbyists are attempting to obtain federal loan guarantees in order to revive an industry that hasn't been able to survive without government assistance since its inception. Now, it is attempting to attract investment by committing taxpayer money to cover losses in the event of problems. Without loan guarantees, the nuclear industry simply doesn't attract investments.
There are many reasons to oppose nuclear energy, and I have outlined some of those reasons here:
http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977118748
But perhaps the main thing you should consider is whether you want to guarantee investments in nuclear energy with your tax dollars.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 29
; )
I am a firm believer in Wind, Solar, Hydrogen, Turbines run off ocean current. There are many more but if we are going to look at Nuclear I think Cold Fusion is the least threatening to the enviornment and could be adapted to uses in Homes, Autos and Industry. I copied the following article below from Wakapidia and there is a lot more info there if your interested.
Cold Fusion
Cold fusion is the name for effects supposed to be nuclear reactions occurring near room temperature and pressure using relatively simple and low-energy-input devices. When two light nuclei are forced to fuse, they form a heavier nucleus and release a large amount of energy.
Cold fusion is the popular term used to refer to what is properly called "low energy nuclear reactions" (LENR), part of the field of "condensed matter nuclear science" (CMNS).[1] Cold fusion was brought into popular consciousness by the controversy surrounding the Fleischmann-Pons experiment in March 1989. For the next 17 years, efforts to replicate the effect had mixed success and panels organized by the U.S. Department of Energy (DoE), the first in 1989 and the second in 2004, did not find the evidence convincing enough to justify a federally-funded program, though they did recommend further research. More claims of experimental success were reported, primarily in non-mainstream publications.
In the early 90's, Pamela Mosier-Boss and Stanislaw Szpak, researchers in the U.S. Navy's Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center San Diego, developed an alternative experimental technique called codeposition, involving electroplating cathodes with a particular ratio of palladium and deuterium[2]. In 2006, these experiments produced evidence of high-energy nuclear reactions concentrated near the probe surface.[3] Based on this work, two other teams have reported similar findings at the American Physical Society meeting of March 2007 (sessions A31 and B31) although interpretations vary.[4]
Just a thought. I dont think a bunch of (3 mile Ilsands) are a good Idea.
Proponents of nuclear energy often criticize renewables - especially hydrogen - as being years in the future, if not decades. This is not true. But it does sound like cold fusion and/or codeposition are years, if not decades, in the future. Hopefully, though, by then we won't need them.
Kay - don't be too sure about a democratic congress. Nuclear energy is more about pork barrel politics, and democrats are not immune. Too many democrats are saying that "nuclear is on the table". They need to hear from constituents.
But I really hope you're right!
But re: "...have you actually met people like that soccer Mom? If they existed in droves, there would be a nuclear plant in every neighborhood--"
Don't forget, I live in Mississippi. Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana and norther Florida - they aren't much different. So, in this region, yes - they exist in droves.
You said it! People down here actually have the "Bush/Cheney '04" bumber stickers on their cars still. You know the 24% that still support Bush? You guessed it - they live in the south.
Steve and All,
These are loan guarantees only , no taxes are going to be spent unless the environmentalists are successful in shutting construction down midstream.
"There are many reasons to oppose nuclear energy, and I have outlined some of those reasons here:"
Except that most of what you post in that article is assumption NOT backed up with any FACTS.
I on the other hand have posted tons of FACTS which indicate that nuclear is, for all energy production less expensive except for coal, is safe, 13'000 operation years with only 2 major accidents, and less polluting than even solar and wind (cradle to grave).
"The number of nuclear plants required to neutralize our current CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels is enormous."
Yes Steve you are correct, so we should start building as many nuclear plants as we can ASAP, so we can begin replacing those nasty, dirty fossil fuel powered power plants.
Yep. That's what I said - you're admitting the nuclear industry can't do it on its own.
Dan: "...so they can help cushion the rising price of oil and help make your hydrogen economy a reality sooner."
Hydrogen doesn't need your help, thanks. Actually, it would be a needlessly expensive and dangerous distraction - so don't do me any favors, except maybe to sign the petition above.
If you removed all of the subsidies from fuel energies you would have two prevalent energies, that would be coal and nuclear.
The majority of subsidies for coal is for "clean coal tech research" NOT production, so if we do as you suggest coal rules.
The second least subsidized energy is nuclear so nuclear would be second in the energy production world.
The cost of solar and wind is still substantial so the removal of subsidies from them will slow their implementation. And hydrogen just isn't reasonable yet.
After watching "nobody's fuel" http://www.nobodysfuel.com I believe we should increase the actual subsidies to nuclear energy production, not just guaranteed loans from the government.
H. Douglas Lightfoot is to me what lovins is to you….. Well maybe not quite the same, but we all know how you lefties are. ;- )
I know the concept of "strategy" is a complicated one, and it involves many convergent variables simultaneously. Lovins is very clear about it, but you have to do some reading. You overestimate the importance of coal and nuclear. With today's technology, solar collectors on our roofs would provide 5x the amount of electricity we presently use.
Dan: "After watching "nobody's fuel" http://www.nobodysfuel.com I believe we should increase the actual subsidies to nuclear energy production...."
I'm not going to pay $25 to watch it - sorry. You can read Lovins' book for free.
Dan: "H. Douglas Lightfoot is to me what lovins is to you….. Well maybe not quite the same, but we all know how you lefties are. ;- )"
How would that be, Dan?
"How would that be, Dan?"
Gullibility Steve, that's all I'm talkin about here. Nothin else.
Solar Panels are going to be a hard fight, until someone takes a high profile case to court. HOA's are probably the single greatest stumbling block right now. Christ, I love in Boulder County Colorado, and can buy Solar Panels (I can even afford them) at a local hardware store. (McGuckins Rocks) but alas, I can't install them because of my HOA.
No need for nuclear. In fact, nuclear will slow transition to (really) clean, renewable sources.
A Strategy for the Hydrogen Transition
Huh?
Phileas: "I love in Boulder County Colorado, and can buy Solar Panels (I can even afford them) at a local hardware store."
You probably are very aware of BP/Home Depot program for residential solar systems, rebated by the state.
Mass Marketing Solar to Colorado Residents: Metropolitan Denver and Boulder Home Depot's to offer complete, installed solar electric home power systems.
Colorado statute C.R.S. 38-30-168 prohibits covenants that ban solar energy devices. It allows "reasonable aesthetic provisions" that do not significantly increase the cost of a device.
My suggestion is to send a letter to the board of directors and request the subject be put on the next meetings agenda, attend that meeting with as many fellow solar advocates, owners of course, that you can muster.
Also, most HOA by-laws require a board to address an issue if a sufficient number of owners request it.
It may take a bit of work but if want solar you can have it.
Nuclear Power Part of the Solution
http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977175197
I can't believe the reason is because you would be so petty that yould would deny me a few points I have to assume the reason you have not responded is that you can not provide any valid arguments against nuclear energy.
What is your solution for dealing with all of the nuclear waste that the plants produce??
I signed both petitions and forwarded them to family and friends. Thanks for the links!
What a surprise!
Ten unsolicited points from the world's worst connection. Merry whatever you celebrate!