Author Topic: Keep America's Nuclear Power Plants Working For US (Read 11822 times)

Rennhack · « **on:** Jun 16, 2016, 06:30 »

America’s nuclear energy plants are a vital asset providing reliable, carbon-free electricity to tens of millions of households and businesses around the country. Nuclear energy plants supply nearly 20 percent of America’s electricity—and 63 percent of the nation’s carbon-free electricity.
Despite their value, a combination of factors place these plants in economic jeopardy. As a result, a half dozen of the 100 in the nation will close in the coming years to be replaced by natural gas.
Respectfully request that the federal government institute policies that recognize the special and unique benefits of nuclear power. The federal government regulates their licensing and operation, but leaves it to the individual states to determine the value of their carbon neutral electricity.

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/keep-americas-nuclear-power-plants-working-us

Marlin · « **Reply #1 on:** Jun 16, 2016, 10:07 »

Done but it has a long way to go to make the required 100,000. "Needs 95,007 signatures by July 8, 2016 to get a response from the White House"

Rennhack · « **Reply #2 on:** Jun 17, 2016, 04:35 »

Yup.

Rennhack · « **Reply #3 on:** Jun 25, 2016, 11:25 »

Quote from: Marlin on Jun 16, 2016, 10:07

Done but it has a long way to go to make the required 100,000. "Needs 95,007 signatures by July 8, 2016 to get a response from the White House"

So, after sending out this email blast to our 70,000 + registered members... and posting it in every nuclear related facebook and linked group I could find....

20,091 signed.

This is why we can't have nice things. I bet an anti-nuke petition would get filled in hours.

hamsamich · « **Reply #4 on:** Jun 25, 2016, 12:04 »

I got at least 8 people to sign it. Way more popular and cool to be anti-nuke. Yeah I'm nuclear, even though nuclear ain't cool. Working 3 week outages while my friends workin 40s, used to work 5 or 6 months, 3 months was a shorty. Yeah I'm nuclear and now nuclear's not cool...

Don't worry everything that isn't cool today will be cool in 10 years. Just look at Pabst Blue Ribbon!

Rerun · « **Reply #5 on:** Jun 25, 2016, 02:15 »

Wouldnt make any difference. Make money and you will stay open

Rennhack · « **Reply #6 on:** Jun 25, 2016, 03:08 »

Quote from: Rerun on Jun 25, 2016, 02:15

Wouldnt make any difference. Make money and you will stay open

Yup.

GLW · « **Reply #7 on:** Jun 25, 2016, 05:29 »

Quote from: Rerun on Jun 25, 2016, 02:15

Wouldnt make any difference. Make money and you will stay open

making money is not a definitive calculation,...

wind farms keep cropping up all over the place,...

they do not "make money",...

http://www.windpowerengineering.com/construction/projects/windpower-profitability-and-break-even-point-calculations/

it would be simple to state it is a simple market driven commodity, but it is not,...

and natural gas has ghosts in the calculation which will eventually catch up to it's "profitability" also: TENORM;

How Radioactive Fracking Waste Wound Up Near Homes and Schools

http://ecowatch.com/2016/06/21/radioactive-fracking-waste/

Here's another complication for fracking — radioactive waste

http://www.pri.org/stories/2014-07-09/heres-another-complication-fracking-radioactive-waste

Study raises questions about measuring radioactivity in fracking wastewater

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/04/study-raises-questions-about-measuring-radioactivity-fracking-wastewater

etcetera,...

Rerun · « **Reply #8 on:** Jun 26, 2016, 10:02 »

Last I checked Exelon and Entergy said they lost a considerable amount of money on various nuclear plants. If anyone can give numbers to refute them I would say I am wrong but I know that aint coming

GLW · « **Reply #9 on:** Jun 26, 2016, 11:02 »

Quote from: Rerun on Jun 26, 2016, 10:02

Last I checked Exelon and Entergy said they lost a considerable amount of money on various nuclear plants. If anyone can give numbers to refute them I would say I am wrong but I know that aint coming

they do lose money, the politics of the regulatory burden and the subsidy cabals are stacked against them,...

so, it is a struggle for most of them to be viable,...

but that is an American political burden, not an inherent weakness of the technology or the market,...

nuke capacity in China, India, Scandinavia, France, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera, is holding it's own or rapidly expanding within an energy policy of baseload power capacity,....

it seems America expects the "smart grid" to hold all the answers before the smart grid has been proven to be able to meet the grid at full capacity at all times,...

my personal thoughts are why burn natural gas in power plants when natural gas reserves could power our current transportation technology for 200+ years with complete energy independence from foreign sources,...

instead we'll burn it off within 2 generations to push electrons, when there are other energy sources to push electrons which are not amenable to transportation uses,...

I see short sighted stupidity endorsed by PC policy wonks,...

I do not see energy policy, only shell games moving taxpayer money around to the friends and family club of the moment,...

Rerun · « **Reply #10 on:** Jun 26, 2016, 11:58 »

Smart grid works just great. Its been the reality in Chattanooga for years. Fact is load is going down a LOT. In unregulated states nukes are an anachronism

hamsamich · « **Reply #11 on:** Jun 26, 2016, 02:46 »

Renewables don't really make money yet on a grand scale. But they will someday. There are plenty of things that don't make money that get pushed. So why is it if only the things that make the most money right now don't have 100% of the power pie? If it really were that simple the number of nuclear plants would not be arguably increasing on a global level. They wouldn't be built by anybody if they didn't have some kind of value. I know you want things to be black and white, but they aren't. Nuclear plants may be the money makers 10 years from now. Maybe not. Maybe carbon free generation will be more important in 10 years, maybe it will be less important due to some discovery. These different types of generation all have value for political, cost per MWH, environmental that makes them more or less desirable. The list goes on. One of those factors will win at different times. Not wanting to understand that is fairly obtuse. Cost is a strong factor, but not always the most important. The rise of expensive renewables is a perfect example. It is the potential of renewables to be such an important low cost environmental friendly power source that has the government dumping hundreds of billions of $$$ in subsidies. There are examples all over the place that provide evidence that cost per MW this year is not always the overriding factor to use certain types of energy. Look around and open eyes.

Rerun · « **Reply #12 on:** Jun 26, 2016, 03:00 »

Sorry it is black and white in the US. A nuke that doesnt make money and has zero prospect of doing so should be shut down.

GLW · « **Reply #13 on:** Jun 26, 2016, 05:34 »

Quote from: Rerun on Jun 26, 2016, 11:58

Smart grid works just great. Its been the reality in Chattanooga for years. Fact is load is going down a LOT. In unregulated states nukes are an anachronism

eia puts demand drop between 1 and 2 percent (residential) for this year, then increasing in 2017,...

my financial soothsayer has natgas doubling within 18 to 24 months,...

china has an expanding smart grid and nuclear, china is also regulated and policy driven, more so than market driven,...

I see where you are correct within realsville as it is, but the realsville we have may not be the best model for long term, I do not think it is,...

Ksheed · « **Reply #14 on:** Jun 27, 2016, 09:40 »

Quote from: Rerun on Jun 26, 2016, 11:58

Fact is load is going down a LOT.

Aparently not in Kalifornia:

"Sweltering heat has strained the region’s electrical systems. Los Angeles DWP said in a statement that Monday’s peak demand, 6,080 megawatts, was more than 50% higher than energy demand on a usual June day.

It was also the highest demand on the grid in June since 2008, the agency said."

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-power-outage-los-angeles-heat-wave-20160621-snap-story.html

hamsamich · « **Reply #15 on:** Jun 27, 2016, 03:24 »

not black and white is it (power demand).

hamsamich · « **Reply #16 on:** Jun 28, 2016, 03:27 »

http://247wallst.com/energy-economy/2016/06/27/air-pollution-kills-6-5-million-a-year-iea/

since our fossil fuel plants are much cleaner than average I'm sure this number is way lower in the U.S. But this is just a startling headline for all the haters out there on nuclear power. Much of the cost and headache associated with nuclear power is waste disposal. But in reality nuclear waste is just a small drop in the bucket compared to what fossil fuels do to people's health. Just another unfair advantage given to fossil fuels over nuclear by our government; they can send a limited amount of crap into our environment but when smidgen of nuclear waste gets out all hell breaks loose. not cool. we should be hanging on to our nukes. nuclear plants have value and much of the world is starting to wake up on that fact. I hope we can too.

Rennhack · « **Reply #17 on:** Jul 04, 2016, 03:59 »

Needs 74,210 signatures by July 8, 2016 to get a response from the White House.

25,790 signed of 100,000 goal

Rerun · « **Reply #18 on:** Jul 04, 2016, 09:46 »

Quote from: hamsamich on Jun 28, 2016, 03:27

http://247wallst.com/energy-economy/2016/06/27/air-pollution-kills-6-5-million-a-year-iea/

since our fossil fuel plants are much cleaner than average I'm sure this number is way lower in the U.S. But this is just a startling headline for all the haters out there on nuclear power. Much of the cost and headache associated with nuclear power is waste disposal. But in reality nuclear waste is just a small drop in the bucket compared to what fossil fuels do to people's health. Just another unfair advantage given to fossil fuels over nuclear by our government; they can send a limited amount of crap into our environment but when smidgen of nuclear waste gets out all hell breaks loose. not cool. we should be hanging on to our nukes. nuclear plants have value and much of the world is starting to wake up on that fact. I hope we can too.

Bullcrap

Ksheed · « **Reply #19 on:** Jul 05, 2016, 09:24 »

Quote from: Rerun on Jul 04, 2016, 09:46

Bullcrap

Is this what this once great industry forum has been reduced to? Just a bunch of 1-2 word school yard rebuttals that have zero supporting evidence and zero net worth?

Boy and some people thought it was bad that news links to current industry related articles are constantly being posted in the Nuke News section.

List of typical replies:

1. Wont happen
2. Your wrong
3. Never gonna happen
4. Bullcrap
5. I know you are but what am I
6. Poophead

Rerun · « **Reply #20 on:** Jul 05, 2016, 10:25 »

Much better than reposting useless links that are really cheerleading stuff that no one has put realistic thought into. In fact I did not come to this conclusion alone. A few long time members and I have been talking about it elsewhere and I have received emails from younger guys asking for help because no one hear gives informed realistic advice anymore. Guess what? I help them and they end up with really good jobs. They know where credibility lies and in virtually all cases its with me. I speak truth, i have tons more experience than virtually everyone here ( and yes there are exceptions as guys like GLW , Mike and a few others have there roots firmly in the real world) I made up a list of plants 3 years ago and guess what? They have all closed in the past 3 years or are in danger due to economic REALITY. I am first and foremost a realist. When you help over 100 people get jobs and actually do well in said jobs then you and others might have credibility. Until then just keep posting links

hamsamich · « **Reply #21 on:** Jul 05, 2016, 03:11 »

I think somebody may be dissatisfied with their choice to get out of the nuke industry and being a part of this board yet lashing out at anything pro nuclear is the only connection left for some people. And if I'm wrong, why are certain people acting like children? Be a part of the conversation, but don't be so obtuse you add nothing of value, whatever your viewpoint may be. There is for sure 2 sides to this story. Is it possible for you to have a constructive debate?

dead
ded/
adjective
adjective: dead

1. no longer alive.
"a dead body" synonyms: passed on/away, expired, departed, gone, no more

1. absolutely; completely.

just a reminder for the vocabulary challenged what dead means, and having 5 new nuclear plants is far from dead for the US nuke industry.

Ksheed · « **Reply #22 on:** Jul 05, 2016, 04:35 »

Quote from: Rerun on Jul 05, 2016, 10:25

Much better than reposting useless links that are really cheerleading stuff that no one has put realistic thought into. In fact I did not come to this conclusion alone. A few long time members and I have been talking about it elsewhere and I have received emails from younger guys asking for help because no one hear gives informed realistic advice anymore. Guess what? I help them and they end up with really good jobs. They know where credibility lies and in virtually all cases its with me. I speak truth, i have tons more experience than virtually everyone here ( and yes there are exceptions as guys like GLW , Mike and a few others have there roots firmly in the real world) I made up a list of plants 3 years ago and guess what? They have all closed in the past 3 years or are in danger due to economic REALITY. I am first and foremost a realist. When you help over 100 people get jobs and actually do well in said jobs then you and others might have credibility. Until then just keep posting links

I'd be willing to bet that more than half the links I have posted in the last 6 months have been about the huge downturn in the commercial nuclear industry related to the economic realities that you speak of. While the articles are out there for everyone to find themselves I chose to share the ones I find most interesting. I guess that is the point of the Nuclear News section of the forum. If you don't like them, just don't read them. It's really that simple.

If I wanted to dig up the links I could list different posts where I offered up my honest opinion to people searching for answers. While my experience may be fewer years and different then yours, I believe it is still valuable. In fact I believe I remember providing you some advice/info on condenser isolation when you were in your previous life (BZ) on here.

While you may save the world through PM's and email, your open forum communication skills are lacking. This post is the most articulate thing I have seen you post in while, and that's not saying much. I fully believe that you have a wealth of knowledge you could share, it's just really hard to get past all the piss and vinegar.

hamsamich · « **Reply #23 on:** Jul 05, 2016, 05:21 »

You love to tout what you are right about, but you never concede what you are wrong about. Many people here saw single unit plants coming down eventually. Get over your own self. People who are actually based in reality can see both sides to everything. While its great you are helping people, you are all about being perceived as a savior and some kind of omniscient being railing against evil nuclear power. I have helped plenty of people get jobs but I don't come on here spilling it all over everyone, do you want a cookie or something? You have a one-sided view and pour sarcastic lava over anybody that had a different experience than you. People are sick of it and it is a shame because you probably do have alot to offer. You are the real cheerleader here, funny you are calling other people that. Most of us can see both sides of this story save a few individuals. Why don't you take your ax off the grinder and join us in the conversation?

Rennhack · « **Reply #24 on:** Jul 05, 2016, 05:40 »

I myself have been meaning to mention that instead of just posting a link to a news article, please at least post your comments and thoughts on the article.