Joseph Romm, Salon, June 2, 2008

No nuclear power plants have been ordered in this country for three decades. Once touted as “too cheap to meter,” nuclear power simply became “too costly to matter,” as the Economist put it back in May 2001.

Yet growing concern over greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel plants has created a surge of new interest in nuclear. Wired magazine just proclaimed “Go nuclear” on its cover. Environmentalists like Stewart Brand and James Lovelock have begun embracing nukes as a core climate solution. And GOP presidential nominee John McCain, who has called for building hundreds of new nuclear plants in this country, recently announced he won’t bother showing up to vote on his friend Joe Lieberman’s climate bill because of insufficient subsides (read “pork” for nuclear power.

What do they know that scores of utility executives and the Economist don’t? Nothing, actually. Nuclear power still has so many problems that unless the federal government shovels tens of billions of dollars more in subsidies to the industry, and then shoves it down the throat of U.S. utilities and the public with mandates, it is unlikely to see a significant renaissance in this country. Nor is nuclear power likely to make up even 10 percent of the solution to the climate problem globally.

Why? In a word, cost. Many other technologies can deliver more low-carbon power at far less cost. As a 2003 MIT study, “The Future of Nuclear Energy,” concluded: “The prospects for nuclear energy as an option are limited” by many “unresolved problems,” of which “high relative cost” is only one. Others include environment, safety and health issues, nuclear proliferation concerns, and the challenge of long-term waste management.

Since new nuclear power now costs more than double what the MIT report assumed — three times what the Economist called “too costly to matter” — let me focus solely on the unresolved problem of cost. While safety, proliferation and waste issues get most of the publicity, nuclear plants have become so expensive that cost overwhelms the other problems.

Read More Here

Create Instant Buzz

Joseph Romm, Salon, June 2, 2008

No nuclear power plants have been ordered in this country for three decades. Once touted as “too cheap to meter,” nuclear power simply became “too costly to matter,” as the Economist put it back in May 2001.

Yet growing concern over greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel plants has created a surge of new interest in nuclear. Wired magazine just proclaimed “Go nuclear” on its cover. Environmentalists like Stewart Brand and James Lovelock have begun embracing nukes as a core climate solution. And GOP presidential nominee John McCain, who has called for building hundreds of new nuclear plants in this country, recently announced he won’t bother showing up to vote on his friend Joe Lieberman’s climate bill because of insufficient subsides (read “pork” for nuclear power.

What do they know that scores of utility executives and the Economist don’t? Nothing, actually. Nuclear power still has so many problems that unless the federal government shovels tens of billions of dollars more in subsidies to the industry, and then shoves it down the throat of U.S. utilities and the public with mandates, it is unlikely to see a significant renaissance in this country. Nor is nuclear power likely to make up even 10 percent of the solution to the climate problem globally.

Why? In a word, cost. Many other technologies can deliver more low-carbon power at far less cost. As a 2003 MIT study, “The Future of Nuclear Energy,” concluded: “The prospects for nuclear energy as an option are limited” by many “unresolved problems,” of which “high relative cost” is only one. Others include environment, safety and health issues, nuclear proliferation concerns, and the challenge of long-term waste management.

Since new nuclear power now costs more than double what the MIT report assumed — three times what the Economist called “too costly to matter” — let me focus solely on the unresolved problem of cost. While safety, proliferation and waste issues get most of the publicity, nuclear plants have become so expensive that cost overwhelms the other problems.

Read More Here

Create Instant Buzz

The Senate will decide this week whether to follow in California’s footsteps and pass legislation requiring cuts in U.S. greenhouse gas emissions to combat climate change.

Lawmakers are set to vote Monday to begin debate on a bill that could reshape the U.S. economy by requiring industry to pay to emit carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases.

Opponents call it a new tax on industry that could raise gas prices and energy bills for consumers.

Now before I knew anything about wind power coming to Delaware, I would be apprehensive about taxing carbon and “increasing the costs to power plants, distributors, and consumers…….

But knowing what I now know, that all carbon prices are about to go ballistic as did our automobile and truck fuel, the faster we leave a carbon based economy, the faster we will pull out of this recession.

Congess just cannot slap the tax on carbon immediately. My recommendation is to start the tax in 2014, giving America 5 years to wean itself off carbon based electricity. Five years could do it…

Wind, particularly offshore wind, if built large enough is the cheapest form of energy available to us today. If solar improves to where it crosses the 10 cents/kwh barrier, it too can become a player….

There is enough wind power capacity in North Dakota to fuel the entire grid of North America…..

The financials show it could be done today for 2.3 cents per kwh… Imagine, all of the US energy needs met at 2.3 cents per kwh. Your $200 monthly electric bill would instead be $40 dollars. Which is right about where it needs to be…….

But not all the wind needs to come from North Dakota, even though it has tremendous potential……Up and down the Eastern seaboard, giant wind farms could drop our prices and save on long distance transmission costs…. From Texas to North Dakota, the wind belt could drive America’s mid section energy prices down to a tolerable level…..

By dropping worldwide demand, we could stop our dependence on energy coming from the Mid East. Being the sole planetary source of 2.3 cents per kwh of electricity, our manufacturing base could again begin to grow in places where it once walked away from union labor……Ohio and Michigan. What automobile company could pass up savings of 20 cents per kwh over what the paid in their home country?

Back to Carbon caps and taxes…..Taxing something that is bad for you at a rather high rate, is ironically a very good thing. It forces you to wean yourself off its toxic properties and seek another solution. It does so expediently. Forcing you to move quickly before your money disappears..unlike a government directive facing appeal after appeal after appeal…….

So raising the price of carbon is in the cards…..the higher the tax, the faster we move to a really cheap source of energy and power…..cheaper than all but the oldest of you can remember……

And if timed right, it won’t cost us a penny. For paying a million dollars for a kwh of coal fired electricity is moot, it there is no kwh of coal fired electricity left to be taxed…. …..

Blog advertising

and had fun perusing the produce, flowers, and local treats.

 

 

 

On our way out we had a flyer on the windshield of our (semi-compact) car.
 I am in agreement that there has to be something done about the oil crisis in our country.  

When are Americans going to wise up about the amount of gas we use?  

Why are we so dependent on our cars?  

When is the presidential administration going to do something about it, well probably not until a new president is elected, at least I can only hope.

Check out this new documentary film’s trailer : “Gashole”     

You will be intrigued if you care at all about the current oil crisis in our country.

Click here to advertise on thousands of blogs including mine

80% of the store was created from refuse and throw away materials, making it simple, cheap and eco-friendly.

This design must make them the envy of hipsters and homeless people everywhere.

The Ksubi Bombed Mache store is located at 1021 High Street, Armadale, Melbourne, Australia.

Click here to advertise on the Worlds largest Blog Advertising Network

“Forever in the celebrity spotlight, the Pacific Wheel has a very impressive list of credits with appearances in more than 105 photo shoots, 71 television commercials, 69 television shows, 28 feature films and 13 music videos,” (Jeff Klocke, director of marketing and sales at Pacific Park on the Santa Monica Pier).

Santa Monica is located in Southern California, and we all know that in The O.C. (TV show) it rained all of about once. SoCal has an abundance of sunlight so Pacific Park is using solar panels to generate more than 71,000-kilowatt hour of renewable photovoltic (PV) power from the sun, and when it’s cloudy they just use conventional energy. More than 160,000 energy-efficient LED lights are used to save power and to complement the solar-power application.

Click here to advertise on the Worlds largest Blog Advertising Network

Delmarva Power:  $110.00 per MWh not even guaranteed for three years.

Do they have a math class in Legislative Hall, particularly on the South End of the building?

Blog advertising

Click here to advertise on thousands of blogs including mine

Create Instant Buzz

On Friday, May 30th, U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions visited the Auburn University campus for a demonstration of our new mobile biomass gasification unit and energy briefing.

Amy Weaver covered the story for the Opelika-Auburn news.  Checkout her story and photographs on the O-A News website.

Thanks, Amy, as always, for your perspective. 

Blog advertising