obama to loan money for new nuke plants

maineman said:
Chernobyl comes to mind.

but we DO have the technology to make sodium cooled reactors that are fail safe. If we could find a political solution for the waste issue, we could power America with nuclear power.
Click to expand...
Cherynobyl is an entirely different reactor design than one we would use. Neither would we allow our plants and procedures to degrade to their level of ineptitude.
 
Yurt said:
about fricken time we get new nuke plants....

iirc, i thought he was not exactly warm to this issue during the campaign, he wasn't exactly opposed, but not warm, glad to see on this issue he has done the right thing
Click to expand...


I’m not against the safe and prudent use of nuclear energy on principle.

But, nuclear energy does not enhance America’s national security, or energy independence. I don’t want us to be reliant on Russia, or other foreign countries for nuclear fuel. See article below. Doing the math off the top of my head, we are reliant on other countries for over 80% of the uranium fuel we use for civilian nuclear energy.

Home-grown green energy, biofuels, and energy efficiency is much more aligned with national security and energy independence. Whatever investments we make, should be prioritized and weighted towards energy that makes us independent of other countries.

U.S. nuclear power plants to get more Russia uranium

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. nuclear power reactors will be able to obtain more supplies of Russian enriched uranium for fuel, under a trade deal signed by the two countries late on Friday.

The agreement will provide U.S. utilities with a reliable supply of nuclear fuel by allowing Russia to boost exports export to the United States while minimizing any disruption to the United States' domestic enrichment industry.

Owners of U.S. nuclear power reactors bought 67 million pounds of uranium in 2006. About 16 percent came from the United States and the rest, 56 million pounds, came from foreign suppliers, according to the Energy Department.


http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN0146993820080202
Click to expand...
 
Bad move....as you have a slew of the damned things operating way passed their warranty with NO PLAN as to how to refurbish them. Then there's all that lovely nuke waste, spent rods and waste water that has to be stored away for when someone EVENTUALLY figures out how to decontaminate it (whicle making a hefty profit for someone, mind you).

In my area, we have a plant that should have been shut down and dismantled YEARS ago...Indian Point. And let's all pray that another 3 Mile Island isn't down the road.

I'm against Obama on this one...and I see that the "conservatives" suddenly have NO PROBLEM with federal money being involved in PRIVATE industry. Interesting, to say the least.
 
Cypress said:
I’m not against the safe and prudent use of nuclear energy on principle.

But, nuclear energy does not enhance America’s national security, or energy independence. I don’t want us to be reliant on Russia, or other foreign countries for nuclear fuel. See article below. Doing the math off the top of my head, we are reliant on other countries for over 80% of the uranium fuel we use for civilian nuclear energy.

Home-grown green energy, biofuels, and energy efficiency is much more aligned with national security and energy independence. Whatever investments we make, should be prioritized and weighted towards energy that makes us independent of other countries.
Click to expand...

Australia would supply most of the nuclear energy. They're a pretty safe supply, so it doesn't bother me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top