Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Two nuclear plants are either under construction. These are Summer and Vogtle. In both cases consumers are on the hook for the massive cost overruns. These plants will cost billions more than advertised. Nuclear plants require huge government subsidies and utility commissions willing to force cost over runs down the throats of poor consumers.
But they do have the benefit of being virtually carbon-free and reliable. They don't need fossil fuel backup plants (like wind and solar require).
Wind and solar require huge government subsidies and increase costs for consumers. I'm not sure if the same is true for nuclear, I will have to look into it.
The last hope of coal is to keep it as a source of power to generate electricity. It will not be a large producer unless some bright people can figure out other uses. You can count me out on that but maybe hope is in the youth of the country.
That isn't true. You need coal to make steel. If we could sell metallurgic coal to China like we did in the early 2000s so they could make steel to build their infrastructure, the price of metallurgic coal would rise and more mines would open back up. China's downturn in building has really hurt US metallurgic coal producers.
Wind and solar require huge government subsidies and increase costs for consumers. I'm not sure if the same is true for nuclear, I will have to look into it.
Depends on how you look at it but those plants are uninsurable by any means and the insurance they do have could never possibly cover the costs of a major accident.
Depends on how you look at it but those plants are uninsurable by any means and the insurance they do have could never possibly cover the costs of a major accident.
But they do have the benefit of being virtually carbon-free and reliable. They don't need fossil fuel backup plants (like wind and solar require).
Wind and solar require huge government subsidies and increase costs for consumers. I'm not sure if the same is true for nuclear, I will have to look into it.
You obviously have no understanding of reserve requirements. Each of these plants will require the control area to operate spinning reserve equal to the unit capacity. That would be 1152 MW for Vogtle. The subsidies for Vogtle dwarf what is given to a wind farm and the busbar cost of Vogtle will be way more than anyone is paying for wind.
That isn't true. You need coal to make steel. If we could sell metallurgic coal to China like we did in the early 2000s so they could make steel to build their infrastructure, the price of metallurgic coal would rise and more mines would open back up. China's downturn in building has really hurt US metallurgic coal producers.
How silly, 50% of the power generated in the USA comes from coal. There is no viable domestic alternative beyond nuclear, and energy consumption continues to rise.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
