Nuclear Power Is 'On Its Back,' Former CIA Director Says

[Marlin]

Nuclear Power Is 'On Its Back,' Former CIA Director Says


https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffmcmahon/2017/09/27/nuclear-power-is-on-its-back-former-cia-director-says/#21f0bc1f6b24

[TVA]

Lol what a load of you know what

[Marlin]

Lol what a load of you know what

Wow seriously, Deutch the chair of the Secretary of Energy's Task Force on the Future of Nuclear Power stated much of what you have said in the past on the dire condition of the nuclear industry but he is full of it


 

[TVA]

Has nothing to do with nuclear weapons or national security. It's a strawman technique

[Marlin]

Has nothing to do with nuclear weapons or national security. It's a strawman technique

The only straw man argument here is yours, he is proposing maintaining our civilian nuclear infrastructure to maintain our status in nuclear power and a seat at the international table in nuclear issues. He parrots your doom and gloom for our commercial industry but recognizes that only those in the game can play. He is an MIT chemist, a former head of the CIA, and the head of a task force on the future of nuclear power. I think I will defer to his experience and unique knowledge on this.

[GLW]

The only straw man argument here is yours, he is proposing maintaining our civilian nuclear infrastructure to maintain our status in nuclear power and a seat at the international table in nuclear issues. He parrots your doom and gloom for our commercial industry but recognizes that only those in the game can play. He is an MIT chemist, a former head of the CIA, and the head of a task force on the future of nuclear power. I think I will defer to his experience and unique knowledge on this.

the notion that commercial nukes make us viable "at the table" is a strawman arguement,...

7000 warheads makes us viable "at the table",....

from the report referenced in the article:

'Although estimates are very uncertain, the Task Force midpoint estimate is that such a
four-phase program would require about 25 years and $11.5 billion for at least some
advanced technologies. The Federal Government would share these costs; the
proportion paid by each partner would vary according the project risk. The following table
provides an illustration of the division of public/private responsibility."


need to tell you this so you're thinking about it,....


11.5 billion dollars over 25 years is only about half a billion per year,....


compared to the billions spent on fusion and we don't have one yet,...


compared to the billions spent on SMRs and we don't have one yet,...


compared to the billions spent on ALWR and we don't have one yet,...


it's not hard to deduce that this is 11.5 billion dollars for PhDs and others to put into their pockets for 25 more years to study, publish papers, project strategies, etc.,....


but not one commercial reactor will come out of the 11.5 billion USD or the quarter century it will take to spend it,...


now,....


the pithy, terse, unresponsive, unpolemic guy is rarely ebullient or voluble,...


but similar critical thinking (as the feigned approbation to debate typed above) is an abstruse manifest in his typeset thumbnails,...


the pithy, terse guy just does not feel compelled to share, nor exhibit the bumptious conceit, to type the obvious,...


his dissection is correct,.... [size=78%] [/size]

[Marlin]

the notion that commercial nukes make us viable "at the table" is a strawman arguement,...

7000 warheads makes us viable "at the table",....

No one thinks that we can do anything about nonproliferation with existing nuclear warheads ours or theirs for the most part. Reprocessing and nuclear plants in general are whats on the table. When we abdicate our role in those venues we diminish our voice in the matter. He is advocating for conventional nuclear power technology advances, when we are not part of that market we not part of that industry and have no voice for those who do.

Our nuclear warheads make us viable for MAD not nonproliferation.


 

[GLW]

.......... when we are not part of that market we not part of that industry and have no voice for those who do......

Nuclear power by country
Country                                   Number of operated reactors
United States United States         99   
France                                       58
Japan Japan                               43
China Mainland                           36
Russia                                        36
South Korea Korea, Republic of    25
India India                                  22
Canada                                       19
Ukraine                                       15
United Kingdom                           15
Sweden                                       10
Germany                                       8   
the rest of the world                     64
World total                                 450


USA percentage of world GDP                          25%
USA percentage of world population                4.4%
USA percentage of world nuclear plants            22%


I dare say we have a voice that's about 5X our due as a function of world population and just about in line with our percentage of world GDP,....


so, again,...

it's not hard to deduce that this is 11.5 billion dollars for PhDs and others to put into their pockets for 25 more years to study, publish papers, project strategies, etc.,....

[Marlin]

Nuclear power by country
Country                                   Number of operated reactors
United States United States         99   
France                                       58
Japan Japan                               43
China Mainland                           36
Russia                                        36
South Korea Korea, Republic of    25
India India                                  22
Canada                                       19
Ukraine                                       15
United Kingdom                           15
Sweden                                       10
Germany                                       8   
the rest of the world                     64
World total                                 450


USA percentage of world GDP                          25%
USA percentage of world population                4.4%
USA percentage of world nuclear plants            22%


I dare say we have a voice that's about 5X our due as a function of world population and just about in line with our percentage of world GDP,....


so, again,...

...and we are declining while other countries are advancing in numbers and technologies. Both TVA and John Deutch agree on that point. Russia and China are moving in on the markets including those at risk of proliferation of nuclear weapons.

[GLW]

......Our nuclear warheads make us viable for MAD not nonproliferation.

our warheads make us viable for MAD with only one country,...

Russia,...

for everybody else it's just TAD,....Their Assured Destruction,...

so,...

we have an equal voice with only one,...

for everybody else, when all the chips are down, we have the only voice,...

unless we choose to play small ball and take one for the team,...

which we seem to do a lot,...

[GLW]

...and we are declining while other countries are advancing in numbers and technologies. Both TVA and John Deutch agree on that point. Russia and China are moving in on the markets including those at risk of proliferation of nuclear weapons.

there's no correlation between commercial nukes and proliferation,...

we bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki years and years before we had our first commercial nuclear reactor,....

building warheads is a matter of will,...

"commercial" nukes only enhance duplicity for those who are duplicitous,...

and we already know who "they" are,...

the former CIA director just likes the spy vs spy gamesmanship angle,...

we already know they and their ilk lie just to lie,....

and that ilk likes a world full of liars who hide behind lies posing as truths just like they do,....

job security,...

gawd forbid we ever have a POTUS who just calls a spade a spade and dam all the duplicitous posturing,....

hell, that type of POTUS would make people's heads explode!!!!!!!!

[GLW]

...and we are declining while other countries are advancing in numbers and technologies.....

that's lack of marketplace competitiveness,...

nukes have a hard time being business competitive,...

and the business of the USA is business,...

[Marlin]

that's lack of marketplace competitiveness,...

nukes have a hard time being business competitive,...

and the business of the USA is business,...

I can't disagree with any of that and that is why the US nuclear industry is on it's back as the article states.

[Marlin]

there's no correlation between commercial nukes and proliferation,...

Really!!! I guess the radiation portals at all of the plants at the security access can be dispensed with then.

https://www.nrc.gov/security/domestic.html

[Marlin]

as gkw sayed
"and the business of the USA is business"

...and the US use to be good at it. Now the world has figured it out and are leaving us behind the point of the article I think we are not really investing in new technology.

may bee the nukes aught two talk too those in the worlds oldest profession sew as two get rich.

Poly-Ticks     










Time warp I must be psychic I answered SloGlo in advance 

[SloGlo]

I can't disagree with any of that and that is why the US nuclear industry is on it's back as the article states.

as glw sayed,
"and the business of the USA is business"

may bee the nukes aught two consult the worlds oldest professionals too learn how to make money wile awn they're backs.

[SloGlo]

Poly-Ticks     

dats dee second oldest profession.

[Marlin]

dats dee second oldest profession.

[Chimera]

and the business of the USA is business,...

The business of the USA USED TO BE business.  Nowadays it seems to be all about sucking off the government teat.  Every time the government takes over a segment of business, it goes to pot . . . whether because of "rule by committee", natural government ineptness, or deliberate sabotage, I don't know.

[TVA]

I don't care what his pedigree is in, he hasnt spent one day in the industry, He is babbling.
Dumb article, ignorant thoughts.

[SloGlo]

...

Time warp I must be psychic I answered SloGlo in advance 

yore powers inn crease exponentially 😉

[Marlin]

All have sinned at one time or another, others trample through with horse blinders on.


Ten commandments of logic/debate

1)Thou shall not attack the persons character, but the argument. (Ad Hominem)

2)Thou shall not misrepresent or exaggerate a person’s argument in order to make them easier to attack. (Straw man fallacy)

3)Thou shall not use small numbers to represent the whole. (Hasty generalization)

4)Thou shall not argue thy position assuming one of the premises is true.  (Begging the question)

5)Thou shall not claim that because something occurred before, it must be the cause. (Post Hoc/False cause)

6)Thou shall not reduce the argument down to two possibilities. (False dichotomy)

7)Thou shall not argue that because of our ignorance, claim must be true or false. (Ad ignoratrum)

8)Thou shall not lay the burden of proof onto him that is questioning the claim. (Burden of proof reversal)

9)Thou shall not assume “this” follows “that” when it has no logical connection. (Non sequitur)

10)Thou shall not claim that because a premise is popular it must be true. (Bandwagon fallacy)

[Natumnate]

Classic case of a strawman stance

[GLW]

Really!!! I guess the radiation portals at all of the plants at the security access can be dispensed with then.

https://www.nrc.gov/security/domestic.html

really?

explain,..with regulation, not supposition,...

[Marlin]

really?

explain,..with regulation, not supposition,...

You mean with reality The regulation and monitors are for the control of fissile material i.e. proliferation.

[GLW]

You mean with reality The regulation and monitors are for the control of fissile material i.e. proliferation.

okay, so once again, for those out there who read the forums but don't know,...

explain how "the radiation portals at all of the plants at the security access" cannot (my words) "be dispensed with", vis a vis fissile materials and proliferation,...

explain,..with regulation, not supposition,...

[Marlin]

okay, so once again, for those out there who read the forums but don't know,...

explain how "the radiation portals at all of the plants at the security access" cannot (my words) "be dispensed with", vis a vis fissile materials and proliferation,...

You are serious right The portals at the security access points are there for Safeguards control of fissile material as well as radiological controls you know the stuff bombs can be made from.

From the NRC site you don't seem to think is applicable here.


The NRC's domestic safeguards program is aimed at ensuring that special nuclear material within the United States is not stolen or otherwise diverted from civilian facilities for possible use in clandestine fissile explosives and does not pose an unreasonable risk owing to radiological sabotage. The users of the special nuclear and certain quantities of byproduct material apply safeguards to protect against sabotage, theft, and diversion, including
Physical protection of facilities and/or special nuclear material at both fixed sites and during transportation and Material control and accounting for special nuclear material.
In order to determine how much physical protection is enough, the NRC has a threat assessment program to maintain awareness of the capabilities of potential adversaries and threats to facilities, material, and activities.



Whether it is really needed can be debated but that we do control fissile material for the purposes of non-proliferation is what the salient point is and we do it at commercial and DOE sites.


 

[GLW]

You are serious right The portals at the security access points are there for Safeguards control of fissile material as well as radiological controls you know the stuff bombs can be made from.

From the NRC site you don't seem to think is applicable here.


The NRC's domestic safeguards program is aimed at ensuring that special nuclear material within the United States is not stolen or otherwise diverted from civilian facilities for possible use in clandestine fissile explosives and does not pose an unreasonable risk owing to radiological sabotage. The users of the special nuclear and certain quantities of byproduct material apply safeguards to protect against sabotage, theft, and diversion, including
Physical protection of facilities and/or special nuclear material at both fixed sites and during transportation and Material control and accounting for special nuclear material.
In order to determine how much physical protection is enough, the NRC has a threat assessment program to maintain awareness of the capabilities of potential adversaries and threats to facilities, material, and activities.



Whether it is really needed can be debated but that we do control fissile material for the purposes of non-proliferation is what the salient point is and we do it at commercial and DOE sites.


 

I am serious,...

you keep posting NRC stuff, but do not show which NRC regs require which indispensable portal monitors for the purpose of controlling fissile material proliferation (all your words),....

last time I knew,....

DOE does not check with NRC concerning SNM,...

DOE does not operate commercial nukes,...

this thread is about commercial nukes,...

[Marlin]

I am serious,...

you keep posting NRC stuff, but do not show which NRC regs require which indispensable portal monitors for the purpose of controlling fissile material proliferation (all your words),....

last time I knew,....

DOE does not check with NRC concerning SNM,...

DOE does not operate commercial nukes,...

this thread is about commercial nukes,...

   Are you going to continue to alter your questions? I cited NRC because that was the primary focus but it does not matter if it is NRC or DOE both control SNM for non-proliferation. From the original article that discussed advancing commercial nuclear power technology to keep the US relevant in nuclear power and non proliferation to confirmation that our plants do indeed monitor and control SNM for that purpose. Misdirection does not alter those facts.




Ten commandments of logic/debate

1)Thou shall not attack the persons character, but the argument. (Ad Hominem)

2)Thou shall not misrepresent or exaggerate a person’s argument in order to make them easier to attack. (Straw man fallacy)

3)Thou shall not use small numbers to represent the whole. (Hasty generalization)

4)Thou shall not argue thy position assuming one of the premises is true.  (Begging the question)

5)Thou shall not claim that because something occurred before, it must be the cause. (Post Hoc/False cause)

6)Thou shall not reduce the argument down to two possibilities. (False dichotomy)

7)Thou shall not argue that because of our ignorance, claim must be true or false. (Ad ignoratrum)

8)Thou shall not lay the burden of proof onto him that is questioning the claim. (Burden of proof reversal)

9)Thou shall not assume “this” follows “that” when it has no logical connection. (Non sequitur)

10)Thou shall not claim that because a premise is popular it must be true. (Bandwagon fallacy)

[GLW]

   Are you going to continue to alter your questions?

I keep asking the same question,...


you cannot answer it,...


you change direction on every response,...


to wit,...


you brought in the DOE,...


the article is about commercial nukes, business viability, and a political position which postultates that without an urgent increase in American commercial nuclear capability then the USA will lose it's "voice" at the table for non-proliferation,...


and then, those postulating the said political narrative need 11.5 billion dollars over a period of 25 years to devise strategies to implement this "urgent need",...


my position is simple:


WW2 was an urgent need,...


WW2 was dealt with in 3 years and 9 months,...


anybody trying to pitch for 11.5 billion dollars for 25 years is not rectifying an "urgent need" for the nation,...


they are lining their pocket with billable hours for their retirement,...


the premise for that 11.5 billion is a strawman arguement,...


after all that,...


Mr. Helms brought in the position of portal monitors at security access being indispensable for control of fissile materials to prevent proliferation,...


in my experience,...


IF the portal monitor at the security access at a commercial nuclear power plant is the warning to the security team that a nukeworker has tried to sneak a bunch of fissile material off-site in his lunchbox for delivery to a bunch of no good nuclear proliferators THEN,...


that commercial nuke has already failed,...

[Marlin]

I keep asking the same question,...


you cannot answer it,...


you change direction on every response,...


to wit,...


you brought in the DOE,...


the article is about commercial nukes, business viability, and a political position which postultates that without an urgent increase in American commercial nuclear capability then the USA will lose it's "voice" at the table for non-proliferation,...


and then, those postulating the said political narrative need 11.5 billion dollars over a period of 25 years to devise strategies to implement this "urgent need",...


my position is simple:


WW2 was an urgent need,...


WW2 was dealt with in 3 years and 9 months,...


anybody trying to pitch for 11.5 billion dollars for 25 years is not rectifying an "urgent need" for the nation,...


they are lining their pocket with billable hours for their retirement,...


the premise for that 11.5 billion is a strawman arguement,...


after all that,...


Mr. Helms brought in the position of portal monitors at security access being indispensable for control of fissile materials to prevent proliferation,...


in my experience,...


IF the portal monitor at the security access at a commercial nuclear power plant is the warning to the security team that a nukeworker has tried to sneak a bunch of fissile material off-site in his lunchbox for delivery to a bunch of no good nuclear proliferators THEN,...


that commercial nuke has already failed,...

I was being facetious, the point being that they are needed. Keep up please. The original article states that we need to maintain nuclear power to stay in the game for non proliferation. You posted.

there's no correlation between commercial nukes and proliferation,...

Then I posted:

Really!!! I guess the radiation portals at all of the plants at the security access can be dispensed with then.

https://www.nrc.gov/security/domestic.html

Since they are there for SNM or in other words for non proliferation to keep fissile material out of the wrong hands.   


 

[GLW]

[Marlin]

"Accuse the other side of that which you are guilty" Source unclear it keeps getting passed around 

[SloGlo]

aye wish eye had won of those sines for my dinner table wit three teenagers!