Slashdot Mirror
Could Nuclear Power Wean the U.S. From Oil?
bblackfrog asks: "Is a Federal nuclear energy program viable? That is, can the USA eliminate our economic dependence on crude oil with a large scale federal program to build and maintain enough nuclear power plants to replace our current oil-based energy needs? The obvious political hurdles are (a) the left opposes nuclear energy, (b) the right opposes federalizing energy, and (c) the oil companies and Saudis wield a lot of clout. This makes a federal nuclear energy program far fetched I admit, however I'm more interested in the economics. Slashdot has covered advances in nuclear power technology. China's doing it." (Read more, below.)
"How much energy is required to replace our fossil fuel consumption? What are the initial costs of the program, and just how cheap could the electricity be? How expensive would it be for our industries to convert? How expensive for home and auto conversions? How much of this cost should be picked up by the government? Bottom line: is nuclear power cheaper than our current oil-driven middle-east policy, with all of its blowback?"
Er, I live just outside of said place and while it may not be a radioactive wasteland it is pretty close to a general wasteland.
On the other hand it is nice not to have to turn on lights at night. Just hold your hand out at arms length and voila! Instant flashlight!
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Just one class 9 meltdown .
Each plant operator is only required to carry $300 Million of private liability insurance per plant. In total the nuclear industry carries only 8.5 Billion dollars of insurance, enforced by a form a government socialism. (Post accident levy).
For an estimate of REAL damages [nirs.org].. take a look a Chernobyl catastrophe
"If accident damages exceed that amount, taxpayers will be asked to make up the difference. Compare that to the 1982 Sandia National Laboratories study (CRAC-2 [ccnr.org]), which projected economic damages of up to $300 Billion (in 1982 dollars) resulting from an accident at the Indian Point, NY reactor site. The 1986 Chernobyl catastrophe already has cost Russia, Ukraine and Belarus some $300 Billion, and the costs-from interdicted land, from radioactive waste disposal, from ongoing health effects-mount daily.";
Folks, that's $300 Billion in 1982 dollars!! Care to guess what that number is today?
I'll bet that it's in the Trillion dollar range.
"Moreover, no other hazardous industry has such a subsidized insurance scheme. "
For the time being, I suggest keeping our Nuclear power source a nice safe distance away, one AU is a good number, and embark on a distributed program to harness the energy it bestows to us all (wind, solar).
Are you retarded? Bush is the most pro-nuclear president in the past 12 years.
If nothing else, Bush would be much better than Kerry would have been. Do you recall Kerry's idiotic position on the Yucca mountain repository? I can tell you as a nuclear engineer that it is Kerry who's putting ideology ahead of science, at least when it comes to that. Do you know what will happen if we don't have a place to put our nuclear waste? It's going to sit around in the reactor buildings. It will build up, until people (Greens/Democrats/idiots/whatever) start saying "oh no, we have nuclear waste that we can't get rid of, so we'll have to shut down the reactors!" They'd also prevent the building of new reactors, citing the self-imposed "inability" to dispose of waste.
Bush supports the repository. Bush supports nuclear power. Fact is, you're a baseless paranoid left-wing troll. Moving away from the energy safety of America and independence of the Middle East's supply of oil is a conflict of interest for the President of the United States.
I had but a simple dream, to destroy all humans.
You just came up with a brilliant radiological dispersion bomb.
First you dig a really deep hole, I'd say even deeper than 600'. Let's double it to 1200'. Dump a crap-load of radiological material and bury it. In a few days, the water table (and much of local area's water supply) would be so highly contaminated, no one would be able to take a shower, let alone drink the water. After a few years, the networks of underground water reserves will have grown and shrunk sometimes interacting with one another and sharing their prescious commodity. As a result, contaminates will have spread into neighboring states destroying their water supply too. During the rainy season (or during snowmelt), the wells below ground will regeneate and spill excess back to the surface (hence the reason we have flooding). Contaminated water from below ground will mix to the surface where radioactive material will enter our streams, rivers, lakes and resevours. In a relatively short amount of time, you will have completely destroyed our fresh water supply.
The scary part is, it wouldn't take that much either.