If we decided to stop use of nuclear power plants - what would we (the US) do next?

[csziggy]

We'd have all those sites with the unspent fuel rods, spent fuel rods too hot to put into dry storage, and fuel rods in dry storage. We have no site prepared or even selected for long term storage of the dry stored fuel rods. So even if we turned off the nuclear power plants, we still have a long term radioactive storage problem.

I can't see giving up the investment in the current plants. The money made selling the power produced while the fuel rods currently in place can help offset the management of the spent rods for a while. Even if we stopped production of fuel rods, I suspect there are sufficient for power production for a number of years. We might as well use what we have, even if the plants are a risk - because they will be a risk whether they are in production or not.

But here is the long term problem - once the usable fuel rods are used up, what do we do with those facilities? We know damn well that the companies running them will duck out on their obligations to maintain them as soon as they are no longer an asset. So who is going to monitor the materials and make sure they are secure? Who is going to make sure the spent rods are kept properly cooled until they can be put into dry storage? Where will we store those containers? Who will guard them and make sure the still radioactive materials are kept secure?

Short term saying "SHUT THEM OFF!" sounds good, but it is not realistic. We as a country need to look at the long range view - we have to figure out what will happen to all those sites and the spent materials when they are no longer usable for power production.

[Statistical]

1. Utilities pay a fee to the government for the spent fuel.

The US government, specifically the DOE and thus taxpayers own every single ton of spent fuel in the US.

[TNLib]

2. I think tax payers will have to decide. Obama is the first president I've seen in a long time

to push nuclear power and use tax payer money to fund it. The private sector doesn't seem to want much to do with it. It's too costly and risky.

I think the solution lies with individuals. Start buying solar panels and retrofitting your homes or deal with the risks of non renewable energy.

[Iwasthere]

3. So what are you saying

Keep them open and create more toxic waste that cannot be safely disposed of? Cut our losses now! Shut down the worse plants. Follow Germany's lead and stop building more. We will come together as a nation and suck up the energy problems and costs that will develop. We must change over to alternatives tomorrow. President Obama, Instead of dumping 30 some odd billion into more nukes put that money into retrofitting factories to build solar wind etc,... This will also create tons of jobs

[csziggy]

7. No, use the fuel rods already in existence

Don't make more, just use up what is already made. Then figure out how to deal with the toxic waste. The fuel rods already in existence will emit heat and be radioactive for X number of years whether or not they are being used. We might as well use that energy since the rods have already been made. But stop making them.

I do agree, put the money allocated for nuclear plants into alternative power production and research. How many solar panels could be put on how many roofs for thirty billion dollars? How much research could be done into alternative energy sources for that money?

[onehandle]

4. And if we shut them off, most every major city would become a wasteland.

Millions and millons would probably die.

[Newest Reality]

5. We don't decide that!

Just as with all the other industries that determine how things will go down to the fine details, we don't get to choose things like this democratically, even though we can voice loud objections and put effort into protests and other actions.

There are powerful industries using the power of money and lobbying to get what they want. Since safety, long and short term, falls very low on the priority list, with profit being job one, obviously the balance of power is determined by the biggest fist of money at the table.

We cannot allow ourselves to project our own sense of compassion and a priority for life first on those who are prostrate members of the Church of Profit and its Mighty Will. Even though I am not religious, I think the God of Profit kicks Satan's Ass big time. Satan is obsolete when it comes to today's newly decanted, demonic hordes. They have powers the Crimson King had never thought of and they don't give a tax break about heaven or hell or souls at all, they just serve the hoarding powers of profit and their joy is to watch millions suffer here, on Earth.

[csziggy]

8. Even though we are the ones who will assume the costs and the risks

Once the nuclear power plants are no longer making money for the Church of Profit?

I know, their voices are much louder than the hundreds of millions human citizens of this country. So we are screwed.

[Newest Reality]

9. Well, I didn't mean to be damning here ...

we are not screwed if we ever come together with enough conviction, power and force to stop this stuff, ey?

I think of emergence often and we can rely on that, even if we logically doubt our impact or capabilities as individuals.

The power of numbers is really all we have left. We should let that sink in good and sound, and when we are finally faced with the most intolerable of circumstances, (my bet is that we are in many ways) then we can give way to the potential emergence and go with the ensuing flow.

I guess circumstances will have to be overwhelming enough that large numbers of us see no other option but to radically shift our priorities in order to focus on doing what simply has to be done to avert a dystopia of untold proportions.

[csziggy]

13. I fervently hope you are right - but I am a glass half empty sort of person

And despite the efforts that started in the 1960s, I still see pollution and toxic waste sites. I see the Republicans rolling back environmental protection laws, even under a supposed Democratic President. Frakking and mountain top removal are still happening even though we damn well know the hazards and damage that happens from them.

Maybe I am just tired. Maybe the demonstrations in Wisconsin and Michigan and Ohio are a precursor to a movement that will restore the accountability of our government to the people instead of the special interests.

I hope it is possible.

[Newest Reality]

15. The points you presented,

along with a very long list of atrocities, weigh very heavy in my heart, despite my attempt at optimism.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

I am rather tired to, having been through much of this endless onslaught for decades.

Still hoping for the people to emerge. Keep in mind that the pendulum can, or should, swing at some point, ey? I think this is the Kali Yuga, if I might use that ancient metaphor. Being somewhat of a Taoist in my later years, there is the Yin and the Yang and we are seeing a lot of imbalance now.

May harmony for all ensue someday.

[csziggy]

17. It's the imbalance that scares me right now

I've never studied Taoism, but I did study a little magic theory in my youth. The path that attracted me was the Middle Path, trying to maintain balance between the White and the Black. We are far from that balance now.

Harmony would be good!

[Newest Reality]

21. Well, then, be scared for now!

For that it is what you feel. In other words, from the Eastern, Zen perspective, don't add levels to what you are actually feeling and go meta on them, i.e., a feeling about a feeling, a thought about a thought, etc.

Mahayana is the Middle Way. Be thankful that you know of it and have some understanding. It might prove, (as it has for me) to be very valuable in these times. It does not matter what you call it: balance, middle way, Tao, Mahayana, etc.

At least, then, you can put this in to some form of deep perspective. Think about that. Yin, Yang, they are one, they are two, they are not one or two. They relate as male and female, hot and cold, light and dark, etc. There is balance and imbalance and one cannot be known without the other. There may be some tremendous imbalance in our world right now, but there is also the issue of your own, personal Yin-Yang and how you might find harmony there, first and foremost.

This is what this is! It cannot be anything other than that. The rest is a matter of comparisons of what was or what might be.

[Cleita]

6. So your reasoning is that if we don't stop using

nuke plants, there will be no spent fuel rods? But if we do stop using nuke plants there will be all those rods with no place to go? I don't follow your reasoning.

[csziggy]

10. No, there will be fuel rods no matter what

But if we shut off all the nuclear power plants NOW as some seem to want, we will have unused, unspent, and spent fuel rods in various stages of storage requirements to deal with. As I said in another post above, there are unused fuel rods that we might as well use as long as they are productive.

Meanwhile, that buys us time to develop a plan for long term storage - if we had a rational policy, that is. It may be impossible since we have not been able to develop one so far. At least if we stop production of new fuel rods we will have a finite amount of spent fuel rods to deal with. If we begin building new nuclear plants, who knows what the end amount will be?

The biggest problem and one that will be dumped into the laps of the entire country will be what to do with the spent rods, long term. AS long as the plants are in production and the power companies see a profit they can be forced to maintain the storage of the spent rods onsite. But given the history of corporations and enforcement of environmental regulations, once it is not in the best interests of the corporations, they will find a way out of that obligation.

So if we prolong production, we give the country more time to come up with a plan. And if we were smart that plan would involve a way to make the corporations deal with the spent fuel rods already in storage long before the plants approach the end of their profitable lifespan. If we were real smart, we'd figure out a way to force the corporations to permanently secure the sites of the plants and the last of the fuel rods.

I don't expect us to be that smart. I look around and think of the number of super fund toxic sites that have never been cleaned up and that have precious little chance of getting cleaned up and know that my hopes are futile.

[Cleita]

14. I don't think they will be shut down all at once.

However, we don't want new plants and we don't want to wait until licenses run out. We want a plan right now to power down these plants ASAP while working on alternative methods of getting energy.

[csziggy]

18. I agree - we need a plan now for how to get out of nuclear power production

But any plan that we come up with now will have to be rammed past the Republicans and maintained through many administrations. I doubt this country is capable of doing that. The corporations have no incentive to do it.

[damntexdem]

11. First of all, the building of new nuclear power plants.

We dare not decomission all existing plants -- not because of the loss of power (although that would be a problem) but because we don't know what to do with the fuel, nor the decomissioned plants. Oh well -- in a few tens of thousands of years the radiation levels will be much lower. ;-)

[wiggs]

12. conserve. use less plastic. eat food produced closer to home. carpool

take mass transit. get a prius. downsize the house. live with family. bike to work. get a solar hot water assist unit. buy in bulk for less packaging. start an edible garden. walk to the market. use passive solar principles. wear a sweater when the house is chilly. take a shower with a friend.

[csziggy]

16. I do some of the things on your list - some are not possible/available

Where I live. I am rural, no mass transit. I drive so little I might as well keep my truck - I need it to haul my horses. The house is what it is, but it is the best insulated, tightest envelop house we could build and with solar hot water. We can go without turning on heat and cooling for several days unless the temperatures are extreme for more than a few days. Most of the air conditioning is to reduce humidity, but we could do without if needed. We do adjust the thermostat to save power.

We use as little packaging as possible - generate one can of true garbage every month or two. I just made a change that will reduce our recycling down to next to nothing. A garden is in the plans. I can't walk distances (at this point I can't walk MUCH) and the markets are at least five miles away. Farmer's market is closer to twelve.

We've done much of what we can and we make changes as we can to reduce our impact even more.

[jwirr]

19. Number 1 we would learn to conserve energy really fast.

[JVS]

20. Mine a lot of coal.