Hope Dim For Nuclear Power In State

[bananas]

http://www.courant.com/news/custom/topnews/hc-nuclear0101.artjan01,0,4455641,full.story?coll=hc-headlines-negg

<snip>

New nuclear development is not likely in Connecticut, or the rest of New England, any time soon. There are discussions about nuclear power — one Dominion official said he gets a couple of queries a week from policy-makers in New England — but at least for now, they are closeted.

<snip>

The reason? Decades of environmental, safety and cost concerns eroded political support for nuclear power in New England. Contributing to the skittishness is the slow growth in electricity use in the Northeast.

And a deregulated power market creates a huge and untested risk for any company that wants to spend the $3 billion to $4 billion it would take to build a new reactor here.

No company could make money on a new nuclear reactor in the New England market as it's now working, the agency that runs the region's electric grid said in a study last summer.

<snip>

Iodine pills given to people who live near Millstone are a tangible reminder of the risks. Safety and environmental problems plagued the plant in the 1990s; its former owner, Northeast Utilities, pleaded guilty to felony charges.

<snip>

[Submariner]

1. $3 billion to $4 billion

That's a HUGE under estimate.

I worked at a nuke plant construction site from '80 to '85 and it cost $4.2 billion in 1980s dollars, I imagine it would be at least double that cost in 2008 dollars.

[Buzz Clik]

4. No doubt. Maybe double, maybe 10 times.

The industry will ask for various exceptions to reduce costs.

[YankeyMCC]

2. "deregulated power market..

creates a huge and untested risk..."

So now they want regulation??

This really isn't just an energy issue but it's so frustrating to me how so called conservatives are blind to how often government resources, taxes and regulation are so manipulated by corporations for the benefit of corporations.

[NNadir]

3. This dimwitted policy will last as long as the natural gas.

Maybe not even that long.

Connecticut gets 46%% of its energy from nuclear power. Dimwits forced the closure of Connecticut's nuke industry in 1997 a rapture of fear.

There was NOT ONE fundie anti-nuke who shed even a tear for all the people who died from fossil fuels that year. Why? Because anti-muke fundies couldn't care less about how many people get killed by dangerous fossil fuels. They have no moral integrity and would rather make empty promises about 2050.

The number of Amory Lovins worshipping car culture brats who have distributed respirators to the victims of fossil fuel toxicity is zero.

The number of people who have been killed by nuclear power in Connecticut is zero.

The number of people who have been killed by fossil fuels while apologists in the fundie anti-nuke ignored their deaths is way more than zero, on the order of millions per year.

Connecticut's electricity profile, including the year that Connecticut replaced all of its nuclear power with dangerous fossil fuel, killing lots of people in the Northeast is here:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/st_profiles/sept05ct.xls

Let's see if they really build all those gas terminals in the Long Island Sound. I predict they won't be able to get gas at all.