|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy |
bananas (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jul-15-09 07:31 PM Original message |
Nuclear Bombshell: $26 Billion cost — $10,800 per kilowatt! — killed Ontario nuclear bid |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lindisfarne (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jul-15-09 07:44 PM Response to Original message |
1. Yes. When all the real costs of nuclear, including storage of waste,decommissioning,&true liability |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
madokie (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jul-15-09 07:49 PM Response to Reply #1 |
3. We must never forget the pro-nukers have been lying to us for years now |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lindisfarne (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jul-15-09 07:52 PM Response to Reply #3 |
4. Yes, and now, even costs are being claimed to be trade secrets in attempts to obscure the truth. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NNadir (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jul-15-09 08:05 PM Response to Reply #1 |
5. Oh bull. The fact is that the dumb anti-nuke set is extremely unfamiliar with economics, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lindisfarne (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jul-15-09 08:08 PM Response to Reply #5 |
6. Did you read the link in OP? Also, in your calculations, did you include the actual |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
madokie (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jul-15-09 10:16 PM Response to Reply #6 |
10. Big guy don't read links |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Liberation Angel (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:17 AM Response to Reply #10 |
13. But they can unrec this issue |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Javaman (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-17-09 12:07 PM Response to Reply #10 |
35. nnadir never fails to entertain. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Sirveri (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:28 AM Response to Reply #6 |
14. you don't need to store for tens of thousands of years. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bananas (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 11:54 AM Response to Reply #14 |
18. No, you have to store it for a million years - EPA requirement, based on NAS report |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Sirveri (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-17-09 01:29 AM Response to Reply #18 |
30. EPA requirement is a smokescreen for the real reason. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bananas (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-17-09 03:07 AM Response to Reply #30 |
31. No, it wasn't a "smokescreen". |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Sirveri (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-17-09 04:54 AM Response to Reply #31 |
32. Time will tell. But with the current state of US politics I see coal in the future. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kristopher (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-05-09 10:14 PM Response to Reply #32 |
37. Oil is less than 2% of current electric generation. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
madokie (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:28 PM Response to Reply #14 |
20. You want mayonaise on that shit samwich |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Sirveri (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-17-09 01:15 AM Response to Reply #20 |
29. tell that to the US Navy and France. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
madokie (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-17-09 05:44 AM Response to Reply #29 |
33. It's easy to be anything one thinks they want to be here on the Internet |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Sirveri (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-17-09 11:36 AM Response to Reply #33 |
34. Wow really, I had NO idea. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bananas (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 03:24 PM Response to Reply #5 |
22. Oh bull. The fact is that the dumb pro-nuke set is extremely unfamiliar with economics, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TheMadMonk (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-17-09 01:10 AM Response to Reply #1 |
28. What were the real costs of earlier non-nuclear power generation methods? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
xchrom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jul-15-09 07:45 PM Response to Original message |
2. 2-4-6-8 -- NUCLEAR POWER -- AIN'T IT GREAT?!?! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Ian David (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jul-15-09 08:57 PM Response to Original message |
7. Nuclear energy is free- we have a giant nuclear reactor in the sky. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lindisfarne (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jul-15-09 09:10 PM Response to Reply #7 |
8. And it's responsible for wind powersolar power, and hydroelectric power. Not geothermal though- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jul-15-09 10:05 PM Response to Reply #8 |
9. For geothermal we can thank the other stars that supplied the material that made the Earth. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dogmudgeon (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 10:40 AM Response to Reply #8 |
16. Geothermal energy is produced by nuclear fission |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TheCoxwain (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 11:49 AM Response to Reply #16 |
17. I doubt that nuclear reaction is responsible for geothermal energy.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SidDithers (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 11:59 AM Response to Reply #17 |
19. I think you've got your Uranium isotopes backwards... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TheCoxwain (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:52 PM Response to Reply #19 |
21. yup .. my bad .. clearly its been a while ..but I think that does not water my argument down |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bananas (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 04:26 PM Response to Reply #17 |
24. 20% planetary accretion, 80% radioactive decay |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Liberation Angel (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:01 AM Response to Original message |
11. K&R and into the greatest page -- let's see if the unrec does it in |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Liberation Angel (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 12:16 AM Response to Original message |
12. UNWRECKER strikes again OFF Greatest page! Damn BUT see this: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bananas (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 03:38 PM Response to Reply #12 |
23. Only a shill would unrec this thread - they want to hide the true costs. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bananas (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 07:25 PM Response to Reply #12 |
25. They've got it down to three recs - they are really afraid of this information! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
madokie (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 07:34 PM Response to Reply #25 |
26. It fits with the way it's been with the nuke crowd from the get go |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Liberation Angel (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 10:14 PM Response to Reply #25 |
27. 3 recs is their goal |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
girl gone mad (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jul-16-09 01:19 AM Response to Original message |
15. No surprise. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DiamondJoe (1 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-05-09 03:47 PM Response to Reply #15 |
36. Who knows the price? - nobody yet |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Fri Apr 19th 2024, 04:49 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy |
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