Time Magazine: Nuclear's Comeback: Still No Energy Panacea

[bananas]

http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1869203,00.html

Wednesday, Dec. 31, 2008
Nuclear's Comeback: Still No Energy Panacea
By Michael Grunwald

<snip>

But some little-noticed rain has fallen on the nuclear parade. It turns out that new plants would be not just extremely expensive but spectacularly expensive. The first detailed cost estimate, filed by Florida Power & Light (FPL) for a large plant off the Keys, came in at a shocking $12 billion to $18 billion. Progress Energy announced a $17 billion plan for a similar Florida plant, tripling its estimate in just a year. "Completely mind-boggling," says Charlie Beck, who represents ratepayers for Florida's Office of Public Counsel. "A real wake-up call," says Dale Klein, President Bush's chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). "I'll admit, the costs are daunting," says Richard Myers, NEI's vice president for policy development.

The math gets ugly in a hurry. McCain called for 45 new plants by 2030; given the nuclear industry's history of 250% cost overruns, that could rise to well over $1 trillion. Ratepayers would take the main hit, but taxpayers could be on the hook for billions in loan guarantees, tax breaks, insurance benefits and direct subsidies--not to mention the problem of storing radioactive waste, if Congress can ever figure out where to put it. And those 45 new plants would barely replace the existing plants scheduled for decommissioning before 2030.

This sticker shock has unnerved Wall Street. A Warren Buffett--owned company has scrapped plans for an Idaho nuclear plant; banks and bond-rating agencies are skeptical as well. In fact, renewables attracted $71 billion globally in private capital during 2007 while nukes got zero. The reactors under construction around the world are all government-financed. "I have to keep explaining: France and China are not capitalist countries!" says Congressman Ed Markey, an antinuclear Massachusetts Democrat. "Nobody wants to put their own money into this so-called renaissance--just ours."

<snip>

So how should we produce our juice? The answer may sound a bit unsatisfying: more wind, less coal but mostly the same electricity sources we're using, until something better comes along. The key will be reducing demand through energy efficiency and conservation. Most efficiency improvements have been priced at 1¢ to 3¢ per kilowatt-hour, while new nuclear energy is on track to cost 15¢ to 20¢ per kilowatt-hour. And no nuclear plant has ever been completed on budget.

Now that's an unsatisfying answer--especially since we'll be paying the bills.


Find this article at:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1869203,00.html

[glowing]

1. I'm already paying an increased price on "future" energy from this nuclear plant shit

Its gaining momentum of angry residents being hit from all sides with increased costs of almost everything. FL legislature passed a bill written by power company lawyers to increase the rates to pre-pay for future energy sources, namely nuclear. People are extremely pissed and are contacting their reps demanding that they do something about this crap.. People are experiencing in some areas almost a 50% increase in their bills. Mine has gone up about $30.00. Everyone keeps taking and taking. Now, the reps are looking around and making statements like they didn't know what the power companies would do. How could they not know that the power companies would just start raising the rates? Florida is bleeding; everyday more people leave than come in. Businesses are shutting their doors. So, the companies are experiencing a decline in revenue. So, they are using this pre-pay clause to continue paying their CEO's and their stock holders. I think the govt needs to take back over the power companies. They cannot do it better for cheaper. They do not upgrade the infrastructure, they don't prepare for whether, and they don't care to make the grid more efficient (since that leads to a loss in revenue). If the electric power was handled exclusively by govt, then people who lose their jobs or are poor could pay a reduced or no rate. Electric power to a home is one of those essential needs. When you don't pay, and they turn off the electricity, it makes for a bad situation for many people. How do you shower and stay connected to the outside world for a job interview or keeping your family clean or having cold items stay cold... Its a health concern and shouldn't be handled by greedy asshole companies.

[madokie]

2. I agree with everything you said

No one should be allowed to get filthy rich off our backs for the very things it takes to live. Look at the profits that our oil companies pocketed that took our country and maybe the whole worlds financial markets down and as they go down the worlds hunger grows. Enough

[glowing]

3. Enough! is right.