jpak
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-04-06 11:09 AM
Original message |
Since 1990 nuclear New Jersey increased its reliance on coal and natural gas by 50% and 230 % |
|
Edited on Mon Dec-04-06 11:40 AM by jpak
respectively.
New Jersey's nuclear climate control experiment has failed.
Over the same period, however, Maine ***reduced*** its scant use of coal by 44%.
Maine generates 38% of its electricity from hydroelectric and wood-fired power plants.
New Jersey only 2.4% from renewable sources.
Maine is developing 1000 MW of wind turbine capacity and over 300 MW of tidal power capacity.
Within 10 years >60% of Maine's electricity will be generated from renewable sources.
And New Jersey???
Someone had to say this...
:evilgrin:
|
whistle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-04-06 12:18 PM
Response to Original message |
1. How much of New Jersey's power is nuclear generated? |
jpak
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-04-06 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
Edited on Mon Dec-04-06 12:39 PM by jpak
from some of the oldest nuclear plants in the US.
If they are not relicensed, they will be decommissioned.
...and there are no new nuclear plants in the cards for NJ.
|
jpak
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-04-06 05:23 PM
Response to Original message |
3. New Jersey's coal and natural gas consumption for power production dwarfs Maine's many times over |
|
It's too bad that "some people" don't "get it"
I thought nuclear power in NJ would make coal go away...
But alas - another nuclear fairy tail.
New Jersey, however, is doing a great job with its **wildly popular** solar rebate program and progress toward its Renewable Portfolio Standard.
It's too bad that their nukes are aging rust buckets and no new ones are going to be built there...
:evilgrin:
|
ramapo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Dec-05-06 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
4. A dim future for the state? |
|
It should be very interesting to see what happens if/when the nukes in NJ shut down. Burn more coal? That is a very ugly option. Burn more natural gas? Perhaps, but I'd hate to be reliant on it.
Solar? Nice...it has been helped by the rebate program but is still quite expensive. The nukes have limited the amount of coal used. Energy consumption has grown since the nukes were built. I'm not a big fan of nuclear energy but I'm less a fan of coal.
|
jpak
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Dec-05-06 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
5. Actually the future is bright in NJ - for renewables (but not nuclear) |
|
By 2021, a minimum 22.5% of the power generated in the state will be from renewable sources - including 1500 MW of solar... http://www.dsireusa.org/library/includes/incentive2.cfm?Incentive_Code=NJ05R&state=NJ&CurrentPageID=1and there are no states with Nuclear Portfolio Standards... http://www.serconline.org/RPS/fact.html
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Mon May 06th 2024, 11:21 AM
Response to Original message |