Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Obama Urges US to Build Nuclear Power Plants

President Obama just finished his 2010 State of the Union Address, and the nuclear nuts must be going ballistic with uncontrolled joy. Much like a runaway nuclear fission reactor. Obama stated (my paraphrase) that the US must build more nuclear power plants that are safe and clean. I think that is what he said. Perhaps it was safer and cleaner. Either way, what he said reminded me of my earlier posting on why nuclear power plants should never be built, titled "Nuclear Nuts." Rather than re-type the entire post, here is the link.

Here are the concluding two paragraphs of "Nuclear Nuts":

"The only thing positive about a nuclear power plant is the fuel is cheap. But, there are energy sources that are cheaper still. Four of those energy sources are solar, wind, wave, and ocean current. A fifth is geothermal, but it is very limited. Yet a sixth is hydroelectric, but there is virtually no possibility of increase. The natural resources of those first four power sources are enormous, and have scarcely been tapped to date. Each has features to recommend it, and each has certain drawbacks. But the drawbacks to not include the use of ultra-hazardous materials, do not include generation of deadly toxic wastes that endure for decades or centuries, and do not include power sales prices at 35 cents per kwh or more. Even the reliability issue is minor and getting smaller with new developments.Innovative and cost-effective storage systems are under development and testing in the national laboratories for wind, wave, and solar, which will forever make moot the reliability issue. Ocean current will not require energy storage systems, as the ocean currents flow no matter what is happening in the environment around them.
In conclusion, the propositions that nuclear energy is safe, reliable, affordable, a huge boon to mankind, and releases no toxics to the environment are clearly wrong. The facts clearly show this. No amount of dreaming or wishing or hoping by the gentleman or anyone else with similar opinions will change that."

Roger E. Sowell, Esq.
Marina del Rey, California


David said...

Was this in reference to CO2 emissions? If so, he's pretty ignorant. I refer to John Christy's research: see part 2 of Christy's presentation that says even if they built 1000 reactors, the reduction in temp would be negligible.

Roger Sowell said...

David, I believe Obama was referring to an Energy Policy, specifically the need for energy independence. He included more domestic drilling for oil in the same sentence (as best I recall, not having seen a transcript yet).

This is a blunder on his part, as electrical power plants do not consume imported oil, so building nuclear reactors has little to do with energy security. Unless, of course, rechargeable electric vehicles become a major player. So far, they have not. Even then, nuclear power plants will not be providing the incremental power to recharge vehicles, as that will be done by natural-gas fired plants or coal-fired plants.

Anonymous said...

when you say it was a blunder, do you mean he ventured AWAY from his tele-prompter and spoke his mind? Or do you mean that his five speech writers and 50 researchers did not do their job correctly and made a mistake?