You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #50: The Nuclear Waste Fund is running a POSITIVE balance [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
PamW Donating Member (566 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-11 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #38
50. The Nuclear Waste Fund is running a POSITIVE balance
Oh BTW - taxpayers will pay for the vast majority of the costs of disposing spent fuel - the Nuclear Waste Fund is woefully inadequate.
=======================================

The Nuclear Waste Fund is running a positive balance. That is there has been more
money collected than has been spent. The NWF has collected about $35 Billion, spent
$10 Billion, and have a positive balance of $25 Billion:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/04/05/usa-nuclear-w...

http://af.reuters.com/article/energyOilNews/idAFN092832...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/02/25/energy-nuclea...

The nuclear industry doesn't get to decide how much it is to pay. Congress sets
the rate. Congress set the rate based on what DOE told them would be the best
estimate.

Once again we see the anti-nukes can't assign fault where it lies. If the tax,
and it is a tax levied by Congress, is too low, then it must be the industry's fault.
It couldn't be Congress' fault. After all, some of our friends are members of Congress...

PamW
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -San Onofre nuke owner seeks $64 millon for seismic study jpak  Apr-12-11 07:01 PM   #0 
  - Here's an offer I would make them.  Cleita   Apr-12-11 07:05 PM   #1 
  - So they want the tax payer to pick up the tab  madokie   Apr-12-11 07:06 PM   #2 
  - I think it is ratepayer money - same diff - the owners won't pay for it themselves  jpak   Apr-12-11 07:18 PM   #3 
  - This is for a plant that is already up?  EC   Apr-12-11 08:01 PM   #4 
  - Why, nuclear energy is perfectly safe  madokie   Apr-12-11 08:34 PM   #5 
  - Seismic studies were done  PamW   Apr-14-11 09:16 PM   #6 
     - Pretending an accurate ability exsts to forecast earthquake timing and severity?  kristopher   Apr-14-11 09:20 PM   #7 
     - Evidently you don't know what a seismic analysis is  PamW   Apr-15-11 05:50 AM   #13 
        - I understand both "seismic analysis" and the diff between "legal" and "social" sanctions.  kristopher   Apr-15-11 06:05 AM   #15 
        - What's your opinion of the seismic analysis at Fukushima?  Wilms   Apr-16-11 12:35 AM   #22 
     - Stranded costs of canceled US nuclear plants exceeded $100 billion - ratepayers paid those costs  jpak   Apr-14-11 09:23 PM   #8 
     - Seismic and tsunami risk assessments were conducted at Fukushima  jpak   Apr-14-11 09:31 PM   #9 
     - Japanese regulation is nothing like that of the USA  PamW   Apr-15-11 05:57 AM   #14 
        - That's right, they are FAR more oriented to public safety in Japan than in the US  kristopher   Apr-15-11 06:22 AM   #17 
        - Tell us about the fire at Browns Ferry and how well thought out that design was  jpak   Apr-16-11 02:08 PM   #27 
           - Again "greenies" can't distiguish between bad design and bad operation  PamW   Apr-16-11 02:41 PM   #35 
              - Who licenses these inept operators, Pam?  Wilms   Apr-16-11 02:53 PM   #36 
              - Deleted message  Name removed   Apr-16-11 03:11 PM   #40 
                 - Please don't lecture me on reading comprehension.  Wilms   Apr-16-11 03:18 PM   #42 
                    - ..the STATE!!  PamW   Apr-16-11 03:30 PM   #46 
                       - Actually, your link does not assert that.  Wilms   Apr-16-11 03:49 PM   #51 
              - There were multiple design problems- those cables were vulnerable to a single failure  jpak   Apr-16-11 02:55 PM   #37 
                 - Then you tell me how you would have designed it.....,  PamW   Apr-16-11 03:18 PM   #43 
                    - Not so fast...  Wilms   Apr-16-11 03:26 PM   #44 
                    - Bad reading comprehension again....  PamW   Apr-16-11 03:34 PM   #47 
                       - Care to address the inaccuracies of your reporting that I have indicated?  Wilms   Apr-16-11 03:50 PM   #52 
                       - No inaccuracies that I can see ....  PamW   Apr-16-11 03:57 PM   #55 
                          - You claimed there was no design flaw.  Wilms   Apr-16-11 04:06 PM   #57 
                          - LOL!111  jpak   Apr-16-11 05:10 PM   #62 
                       - Have you invented a molten salt breeder reactor?  jpak   Apr-16-11 05:07 PM   #61 
                    - I would have designed it as a hybrid solar/wind plant with a biomass auxiliary  jpak   Apr-16-11 05:02 PM   #59 
     - Tell us how well Rancho Sucko worked out for SMUD customers  jpak   Apr-14-11 09:33 PM   #10 
        - Getting rid of Rancho Sucko (Seco) cost a lot, but was ultimately cost saving to people in  diane in sf   Apr-14-11 11:33 PM   #11 
        - More "greenie logic" - aka "illogic"  PamW   Apr-15-11 09:10 PM   #21 
           - Well then, how is the very existence of a firm named SMUD help to confirm the industry's integrity?  Wilms   Apr-16-11 12:47 AM   #23 
           - SMUD isn't a firm....  PamW   Apr-16-11 02:04 PM   #26 
              - Brownies lost and rightly so  jpak   Apr-16-11 02:14 PM   #29 
              - Who, in fact, ran the plant then?  Wilms   Apr-16-11 02:21 PM   #30 
                 - There was no firm  PamW   Apr-16-11 02:26 PM   #33 
                    - Were these operators licensed, or hired off the street?  Wilms   Apr-16-11 02:30 PM   #34 
                       - The anti-nukes wrote the book on it.  PamW   Apr-16-11 03:04 PM   #39 
                          - Who licenses the operators of the steam plant?  Wilms   Apr-16-11 03:13 PM   #41 
                             - No error here...  PamW   Apr-16-11 03:29 PM   #45 
                                - An error on your part, and lie to cover it, AND insult me, again.  Wilms   Apr-16-11 03:44 PM   #49 
                                   - ...and I stand by it as accurate...  PamW   Apr-16-11 03:55 PM   #54 
                                      - More equivocating. The record of your inaccurate reporting stands. n/t  Wilms   Apr-16-11 04:09 PM   #58 
           - Rancho Sucko was a POS with an abysmal capacity factor - it was a money pit  jpak   Apr-16-11 02:12 PM   #28 
              - If you don't know how to run it - no machine works well  PamW   Apr-16-11 02:22 PM   #31 
                 - Brownie logic sez nukes are cheap, run perfectly and never harmed a fly  jpak   Apr-16-11 02:26 PM   #32 
        - The plant never had a chance.  PamW   Apr-15-11 06:08 AM   #16 
        - So do have any links supporting your claim that anti-nukers prevented firing knuckleheads?  Wilms   Apr-16-11 12:57 AM   #24 
        - How well did the Coldwater Creek Geothermal plant work out for them?  Throckmorton   Apr-15-11 08:59 PM   #20 
  - The faster we can close these dangerous, obsolete nuke plants down the better off we'll be  diane in sf   Apr-14-11 11:45 PM   #12 
  - Nuclear power is uninsurable  SHRED   Apr-15-11 10:40 AM   #18 
  - You've been reading the anti-nuke propaganda.  PamW   Apr-15-11 08:50 PM   #19 
     - You're both missing the real point. Who's really gonna pay?  Wilms   Apr-16-11 01:07 AM   #25 
     - Of course - that's why they are called "consumers"  PamW   Apr-16-11 03:39 PM   #48 
        - Thank you for making my point.  Wilms   Apr-16-11 03:53 PM   #53 
     - Well then, let's test that stupid hypothesis and repeal Price-Anderson - then see what happens  jpak   Apr-16-11 03:00 PM   #38 
        - The Nuclear Waste Fund is running a POSITIVE balance  PamW   Apr-16-11 03:46 PM   #50 
           - The last cost estimate for Yucca Mountain was $100+ billion  jpak   Apr-16-11 04:00 PM   #56 
  - Once more a thread bogged down in arguments  Turbineguy   Apr-16-11 05:02 PM   #60 
     - What are you censoring about?  Wilms   Apr-16-11 05:33 PM   #63 
        - Fantastic!  Turbineguy   Apr-16-11 05:52 PM   #64 
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC