100 new nuclear power plants = $2-4 trillion more than other sources combined (Brown, Alabama)

[delusianne]

U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) wants to see 100 new nuclear power plants built within the next 20 years. Alexander spoke to 200 conservationists today at a forum hosted by conservative think tank Resources For The Future.

Sen. Alexander: 100 U.S. Power Plants In 20 Years – Talk Radio News Service (http://talkradionews.com/2009/10/sen-alexander-100-u-s-power-plants-in-20-years/ - broken link)

[T]he cost to build 100 new reactors in the U.S. would run to trillions of dollars.... The report finds that it would cost $1.9 trillion to $4.1 trillion more over the life of 100 new nuclear reactors than it would to generate the same electricity from a combination of more energy efficiency and renewable energy sources.

Dr. Cooper said: "We are literally seeing nuclear reactor history repeat itself. The 'Great Bandwagon Market' that ended so badly for consumers in the1970s and1980s was driven by advocates who confused hope and hype with reality." The study finds that new reactor costs are now more than four times greater than original "renaissance" projections.

Study Shows Trillions of Dollars in Excess Costs If U.S. Builds 100 Nuclear Reactors — Alliance For Nuclear Responsibility

[mhounit]

I think it's safe to say that there won't be 100 new nuclear power plants built in the next 20 years .
And , which energy sources was the good Doctor referring to ?

[KevK]

We need those plants. It sounds like lots of money but bonds paid out over the life of the plants would not be that expensive. Build them!

[momonkey]

Originally Posted by delusianne

U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) wants to see 100 new nuclear power plants built within the next 20 years. Alexander spoke to 200 conservationists today at a forum hosted by conservative think tank Resources For The Future.

Sen. Alexander: 100 U.S. Power Plants In 20 Years – Talk Radio News Service (http://talkradionews.com/2009/10/sen-alexander-100-u-s-power-plants-in-20-years/ - broken link)

[T]he cost to build 100 new reactors in the U.S. would run to trillions of dollars.... The report finds that it would cost $1.9 trillion to $4.1 trillion more over the life of 100 new nuclear reactors than it would to generate the same electricity from a combination of more energy efficiency and renewable energy sources.

Dr. Cooper said: "We are literally seeing nuclear reactor history repeat itself. The 'Great Bandwagon Market' that ended so badly for consumers in the1970s and1980s was driven by advocates who confused hope and hype with reality." The study finds that new reactor costs are now more than four times greater than original "renaissance" projections.

Study Shows Trillions of Dollars in Excess Costs If U.S. Builds 100 Nuclear Reactors — Alliance For Nuclear Responsibility

"Alliance for Nuclear Responsibilty"


End of story.

[ozzie679]

Originally Posted by KevK

We need those plants. It sounds like lots of money but bonds paid out over the life of the plants would not be that expensive. Build them!

= jobs and clean energy. I agree wholeheartedly!

[texdav]

Basically we srewed up stopping nuclear back then ;the french now prodcue 70% of their electrical by nuclear. I see no alternative that is feasible really.

[High_Plains_Retired]

As soon as they learn how to store the waste in the States that want them, I say build 'em.

[nononsenseguy]

Originally Posted by KevK

We need those plants. It sounds like lots of money but bonds paid out over the life of the plants would not be that expensive. Build them!

I'm surprised you would be for them, Kev. I thought you were liberal beyond all hope.

I think we should build them too, but they should be built by the power companies, don't you think? Did the government build the ones already in existance?

Hmmm, to answer my own question, probably the TVA built the Browns Ferry Plant. What about others? ConEd has some. Did they build them? Southern Cal Edison has the San Onofre plants. Who paid for them?

I've been to the ConEd plant in Peekskill N.Y., and also the Browns Ferry Plant in Alabama.

[nononsenseguy]

Originally Posted by momonkey

"Alliance for Nuclear Responsibilty"


End of story.

Probably right. They don't want them built.

[summers73]

Nuclear energy sure as heck is NOT clean. Strip mining for uranium as well as refining it is extremely dirty and increasingly bad for the environment as uranium becomes harder to find. Just because you see the clean final product does not mean it's actually clean.