U.S. Gives Nuclear Power a Second Look

[Mugu]

by Greg Allen

After a hiatus of nearly three decades, nuclear energy is booming. Seventeen power companies in the U.S. are making plans to build more than 30 nuclear plants.

One important factor in the resurgence: new federal and state laws that help utilities pay for nuclear plants that, if completed, would be among the most expensive projects ever built in the country.

One state where nuclear power is making a comeback is Florida. At a meeting last week in Tallahassee, Florida's Public Service Commission voted to approve the state's first new nuclear plants in decades.

Commission member Nathan Skop hailed the decision. "Simply put, nuclear power is a strategic investment for the state of Florida and our national security—to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and to protect our environment," he said.


Complete article at:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89169837

[Ordr]

1. Finally.

[zonmoy]

3. don't know about that.

would rather either have the earths population drop to the point that the food and energy capacities would be more than enough to cover all mankind. plus the fact that the waste produced by nuclear fission is a pain to deal with. best solution though would be to reduce human numbers and create new technologies including fusion and solar.

[Ordr]

4. I agree it is a pain to deal with.

But, in the short/mid-term, modern nuclear is far superior than the other options. Unfortunately, solar (my number 1 choice by far) is far too inefficient to be cost-effective at the moment. Nanotechnological breakthroughs in the next 20 years will definitely solve that but for now modern fission seems to be the best way to go.

[zonmoy]

5. which only shows that we need to create new technologies.

as well as find ways to convince people that having a growing population is not a good idea.

[Ordr]

6. But what are we to do in the interim?

[zonmoy]

8. have to go with the nuclear option and solar as much as possible too.

have to use all available options till we can create new ones or until civilization collapses from lack of energy supplies. whichever happens.

[RedCappedBandit]

7. As a species we always think about the short term benefits.

That is one of our biggest problems, IMO.

[zonmoy]

9. and what of the people that starve or freeze in the winter

because there is no energy to grow their food or heat their homes. while we wait for a long term solution if one exists.

[RedCappedBandit]

11. Yeah , I could play that game too

..but I won't.
Fact of the matter is, dirty energy has vast and devastating consequences. There are other changes we could begin to make that would help alleviate our NEED to use so much energy .. but we're lazy, and we won't take such steps.

[flashl]

2. And, nuclear waste ...

Is it a state's right to import nuclear waste?

If states are willing to accept foreign nuclear waste, there's no reason the federal government should prohibit them, says a Utah congressman whose district could get tons of Italian leftovers.

"I don't see it as a federal issue," U.S. Rep. Rob Bishop told The Associated Press.

"If the state of Tennessee wants to take it, and if the state of Utah wants to take it, I'm going to punt it back to them. It is within their purview," the Republican said.

EnergySolutions Inc. wants to import about 20,000 tons of waste from Italian nuclear plants for processing in Tennessee. After processing, about 1,600 tons would be shipped to the company's facility 70 miles west of Salt Lake City — and within Bishop's district —, for disposal. It is the largest and only privately owned radioactive-waste dump in the U.S.

Is importing nuclear waste plus trains and trucks moving waste across America to Yucca 'strategic' thinking too?

[Gman]

10. Many modern power plants burn coal and not oil

there is no reduction in dependence on foreign oil. So that's a lie.

THey'll be damned before they use the excuse that they want to reduce greenhouse gases.