General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPro-nuke people don't like Bernie
From what I hear, Bernie will end the subsidies to nuke power.
Of course they wouldn't like him, the whole nuke industry is dependent on government subsidies. Especially the insurance subsidy that government gives the industry. No private company will completely insure a nuke plant, so the government guarantees to pay for the excess damages nuke plants are capable of causing.
Go Bernie!! He just may save us. But only if we elect him as President of the United States come 2016.
NoJusticeNoPeace
(5,018 posts)both nukes and coal?
I know we could create that over time, but now?
kristopher
(29,798 posts)You'll probably want to read the article at this link in its entirety.
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2015/04/renewables-vs-nuclear-do-we-need-more-nuclear-power?page=all
...Lets take a look at the last 10 years and the next 10 years
New U.S. renewable and nuclear capacity added the last 10 years (output):
55 GW utility wind (22 GW)
17 GW rooftop PV solar (3.5 GW)
10 GW utility PV and solar thermal (2.5 GW)
15 GW biomass and biogas (12 GW)
3 GW Geothermal (2.5)
Total renewables: 100 GW (42.5 GW)
Total nuclear: Marginal increase from existing plants
(2004-2014 = approx 2.6MWe of up-rated nuclear generation - K)
.....
U.S. renewable and nuclear plan the next 10 years capacity and (output):
130 GW utility wind (52 GW)
75 GW rooftop PV solar (15 GW)
35 GW utility PV and thermal solar (9 GW)
60 GW biomass and biogas (51 GW)
5 GW Geothermal (4 GW)
Additional renewable power next 10 years: 305 GW (131 GW)
Additional nuclear power next 10 years: 5.6 GW (5.1 GW)
The above output numbers for renewables assume no advances in wind or solar efficiency and no grid storage. Both assumptions will become completely false, so the 131 GW number should be considered a minimum number....
There is much more to the discussion: http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2015/04/renewables-vs-nuclear-do-we-need-more-nuclear-power?page=all
Now, about that minimum number and storage:
...
...
While companies like Coda Energy, Green Charge Networks and Stem have also applied for SGIP funds, Tesla accounts for almost half of all storage applications, Bloomberg New Energy Finance said in an April 2 report published for clients. BNEF also said Tesla accounts for about 70 percent of SGIP storage projects connected to Californias grid.
Jackson Family Wines, based in Santa Rosa, has a new partnership with Tesla involving battery storage and several vehicle charging stations, according to the February issue of Wine Business Monthly. The winery declined to comment.
Mack Wycoff, Wal-Marts senior manager for renewable energy and emissions, said the company is intrigued by energy storage. Instead of pulling electricity from the grid, you discharge it from the battery, he said. Ideally you know when your period of peak demand is, and you discharge it then.
Mike Martin, Cargills director of communications, declined to provide details about how the company plans to use Tesla batteries at the Fresno plant. The 200,000-square-foot facility, one of the largest of its type in California, produces nearly 400 million pounds of beef each year.
Janet Dixon is director of facilities at the Temecula Valley Unified School District in southern California, which plans to install solar panels at 20 of its 28 schools this summer. Dixon said that SolarCity is the solar provider, and five of the facilities will have Tesla batteries.
...
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2015/04/tesla-powered-wal-mart-stores-attest-to-musks-energy-storage-ambitions?cmpid=WNL-Wednesday-April29-2015
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)There is now a nuke plant being built in Georgia that would not have ever been started if the US government had not pledged to guarantee that the loans used to build the plant would be paid.
Yep, that's right --- if the plant never goes on line and never produces even one killer-watt, taxpayers will still pay off the banksters. Until now, not one crooked bankster has made a nuke construction loan in about 20 years. Even they are too smart to take such a risk; without you backing them.
Bernie will end the subsidizing of banksters.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)That's it. So, they shake down the taxpayer.
http://www.iii.org/article/insurance-coverage-nuclear-accidents
Ask Japan how much TEPCO's forked out and how many people are still dispossessed?
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Hard to calculate. Over a trillion US dollars, easily.
If just one reactor near NYC goes Fuku, it would make Fukushima look small.
Thanks Price-Anderson, you sold us a forever more pile of nuke waste. Rest not in peace, you butts.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Start with the energy grid. For the cost of Iraq War, we could've built National 100% Renewable Clean Energy Grid. I kid you not.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/for-the-price-of-the-iraq-war-the-u-s-could-have-a-100-renewable-power-system/5330881
But, no. War Inc. needs the plutonium and Wall Street needs the welfare.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)We could have had a modern grid with the money wasted on Iraq.
And we need one today more than ever, with solar and wind keeping it electrified as base power.
Bernie will make it happen come 2017. No one else can do it. Bernie can. And he will, if we just Bernie the chance.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Zorra
(27,670 posts)RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)I can't remember another politician with as much sensibility as Bernie.
Of course the dark side will fight like hell against him. Nukers are lining up as we speak. We will beat them with grassroots and the TRUTH.