« Potholes and climate change: A costly marriage | Main | Big Ag watchdog keeps branching out »

02/11/2014

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Joe

Anyone investing their own money in Nuclear has not done their homework.

First Energy has been trapped by their own averas --thus socializing cost ( massive waste storage problems) and privatizing the government subsidized profits!

daniel

The government has made it so costly to open and update nuclear power plants (due to years of regs and court battles per plant, none of which happens on a timeline)that these plants will go away over the next twenty years or more dangerously, be renewed despite being past their planned useful lives. In the end, poor and middle class will pay more for electricity, lowering their buying power due to government ineptness.

Joe

Sorry-- the need to control a process that is as dangerous as nuclear energy production has kitted the costs. Inmost cases the NRC has been to compliant to the industry --/ example San Onofre, Fort Calhoun, and Three Mile Island.
,
In the end it is the children that suffer the effects of radiation dumps, and leakage. Also the poor will pay for hundreds if thousands of years of radioactive waste.

Time to realize nuclear is antiquated technology.

daniel

There is a need to control the process. It should not take ten years. It should be done in a year or two. Anti nuke people use the process to run up the cost and cause abandonment of nuke power, a misuse of government. As far as the dangers, every energy procurement has dangers. Many times more people have died from mining, transporting and the air quality caused by fossil fuels than nuclear.

Ted Magee

$600,000 would buy alot of wind and solar energy.

Ted Magee

$500,000 for the last reapir on the cap of the reactor. Wind and soalr would be up and running right now if they had done it then.No nuke waste .

Bill O'CONNOR

It will take 2500 windmills to replace the Fermi, Davis Besse, and Monroe power plants on the south shore of Lake Erie. They would be pretty much lined up end to end from the Detroit River to Cleveland. I bet the bird watchers would love it!

daniel

2500 would not do it as you need to build matching storage or what they build now, matching natural gas plants to produce power when the wind or sun stops. This doubles the cost.

Steve Keller

The commercial nuclear industry does not receive subsidies. Wind and solar do. And if the utilities think the $600,000 would buy a lot of solar or wind, they and the other utilities would have built the renewables instead of upgrading nukes. Solyndra and all the other renewables got tens of billions of dollars of gov't loans with ZERO interest, because Obama's Stimulus paid the Credit Subsidy Fee. At best, the taxpayers break even, and in reality they have lost billions already, and lost $3 with Cash for Clunkers, which was just a giveaway of taxpayers' money to car buyers. This ought to outrage the so-called taxpayers' watchdogs. The nuclear loan-guarantee applicants have to pay whatever the DOE wants for the credit subsidy fee and ranges from a few to 30% percent. The gov't profits from nukes.

KitemanSA

Tom,
A loan guarentee is not a subsidy unless the company defaults, like Solyndra, A123, Beacon... All that loan guarentee says, in essense, is that IF the government screws up the borrower, the lender won't suffer.

Also, you REALLY need to re-read the Price Andersen Act if you think that is a subsidy.

KitemanSA

Ted Magee wrote "no nuke waste".

Actually Ted, the building of windmills on average results in the release of about 8 times the weight of radioactive materials into the environment as nuclear power produces in "waste". And the Nuclear power industry doesn't actually release theirs into the environment except during major accidents.

KitemanSA

Joe wrote: "Inmost cases the NRC has been to compliant to the industry --/ example San Onofre, ..."

Surely you jest! It was the NRC's total NONcompliance with the simple, perfectly valid engineering presented by "the industry" that caused SONGS to be shut down. The NRC has been the main impediment to nuclear power since its inception.

The AEC was perhaps too much of an industry cheerleader, but the NRC has swung WAY too far in the other direction.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

"Heaven is under our feet as well as over our heads."
- Henry David Thoreau

About Ripple Effect

Every pollution battle ultimately comes down to mankind's desire to better itself while protecting its sense of home. In this blog, Blade Staff Writer Tom Henry looks at how Great Lakes energy-environmental issues have a ripple effect on our public health, our natural resources, our economy, our psychological well-being, and our homespun pride.

About Tom Henry

Tom Henry is an award-winning journalist who has covered primarily energy and environmental issues the past two decades. He is a member of the national Society of Environmental Journalists, one of North America's largest journalism groups.

Contact:
Email (preferred):
thenry@theblade.com
Phone: 419-724-6079
FAX: 419-724-6439
Address: c/o The (Toledo) Blade,
541 North Superior Street, Toledo, OH 43660

Read Online