Help | Contact Us
NukeWorker Menu

Message To Ohio Electricity Customers -- Stop Closing Nuclear Plants

Started by Marlin, Jun 18, 2019, 11:36

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Marlin


Mounder

The gas companies are advertising and hard-selling the notion that First Energy will be take corporate bonuses from the dollars collected if the Bill passes. Its sad that the wind and solar energy groups are already enjoying the subsidizing efforts and are looking the other way. Just add something to the bill to impede any profit-taking by First Energy.

atomicarcheologist

They are doing the same thing in PA, running ads on every radio station and in most newspapers. Sure would be nice for the nuclear power industry to get in the mud and fight.

RDTroja

Same old story... there is no 'Nuclear Power Industry' only a minor subset of the 'Electricity Generation Industry' that only accounts for 20% (and falling) of our national capacity. The way to promote nuclear is to compare it to the other 80% and, in the process, show how bad the traditional methods of generating power are. If you owned a utility would you rather replace the 20% that the public already fears or the 80% that they don't know well enough to fear?
"I won't eat anything that has intelligent life, but I'd gladly eat a network executive or a politician."

                                  -Marty Feldman

"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to understand that it bears a very close resemblance to the first."
                                  -Ronald Reagan

I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: 'O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous.' And God granted it.

                                  - Voltaire

Mounder

They run clips of billowing steam from cooling towers as a negative connotation against nuclear power, as if the water vapor is something covertly hazardous.  A tiny bit funny, but mostly sad

GLW

Quote from: RDTroja on Jun 20, 2019, 05:57
Same old story... there is no 'Nuclear Power Industry' only a minor subset of the 'Electricity Generation Industry' that only accounts for 20% (and falling) of our national capacity. The way to promote nuclear is to compare it to the other 80% and, in the process, show how bad the traditional methods of generating power are. If you owned a utility would you rather replace the 20% that the public already fears or the 80% that they don't know well enough to fear?

in the big picture there is more fear (and control) to be had with closing the nuke plants,....

if you close the plants the only viably reliable alternative is natural gas,....

with natural gas the emissions will climb,....

with climbing emissions you stoke "climate change" hysteria,...

with hysteria you can pass ever more laws and ever more control over people's daily lives,....

including "sin taxes" for those who contribute more than their "fair share" to climate change but can afford to do so,...

you don't get any of that with nuclear,...

been there, dun that,... the doormat to hell does not read "welcome", the doormat to hell reads "it's just business"

Marlin

Quote from: GLW on Jun 21, 2019, 05:46
with natural gas the emissions will climb,....

Maybe the perception but not in fact.

Chart: American CO2 Emissions Are WAY Down Due To Fracking

America's carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions have fallen 12 percent since 2005, due to increased natural gas production from hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, according to a report published Monday by the Energy Information Administration (EIA).

https://dailycaller.com/2016/05/09/chart-american-co2-emissions-are-way-down-due-to-fracking/

GLW

Quote from: Marlin on Jun 21, 2019, 05:51
Maybe the perception but not in fact.

Chart: American CO2 Emissions Are WAY Down Due To Fracking

America's carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions have fallen 12 percent since 2005, due to increased natural gas production from hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, according to a report published Monday by the Energy Information Administration (EIA).

https://dailycaller.com/2016/05/09/chart-american-co2-emissions-are-way-down-due-to-fracking/

okay, so I read the article and by your logic when natural gas from fracking replaces coal generated electricity (as per the article) then emissions per generated megawatt go down,....

and when natural gas from fracking replaces nuclear generated electricity then again the emissions per generated megawatt will go down even further?!?

been there, dun that,... the doormat to hell does not read "welcome", the doormat to hell reads "it's just business"

Marlin

Quote from: GLW on Jun 21, 2019, 06:32
okay, so I read the article and by your logic when natural gas from fracking replaces coal generated electricity (as per the article) then emissions per generated megawatt go down,....

and when natural gas from fracking replaces nuclear generated electricity then again the emissions per generated megawatt will go down even further?!?

Quote from: GLW on Jun 21, 2019, 05:46
with climbing emissions you stoke "climate change" hysteria,...

What climbing emissions? It is dropping nuke or no nuke.

atomicarcheologist

This article is the type that makes staticians look bad. Maybe I missed the reference mark of what the dropping emissions was measured against, but was it per gigawatt generation of all electric power production, carbon generation power production, or simply U S.A. emissions in total?

GLW

Quote from: Atomic Archeologist on Jun 23, 2019, 05:08
This article is the type that makes staticians look bad. Maybe I missed the reference mark of what the dropping emissions was measured against, but was it per gigawatt generation of all electric power production, carbon generation power production, or simply U S.A. emissions in total?


....The EIA estimates that roughly 68 percent of the falling CO2 emissions are due to the switch from coal to natural gas.....

been there, dun that,... the doormat to hell does not read "welcome", the doormat to hell reads "it's just business"

GLW

Quote from: Marlin on Jun 21, 2019, 08:07
What climbing emissions? It is dropping nuke or no nuke.

then there's no emissions arguement for nukes,...

except as jobs programs for nukeworkers,...

been there, dun that,... the doormat to hell does not read "welcome", the doormat to hell reads "it's just business"

Marlin

Quote from: GLW on Jun 23, 2019, 08:12
except as jobs programs for nukeworkers,...

You say that like it's a bad thing  8)

atomicarcheologist

Quote from: GLW on Jun 23, 2019, 08:11

....The EIA estimates that roughly 68 percent of the falling CO2 emissions are due to the switch from coal to natural gas.....
My bad for skimming the article. But, I probably already has a bias, unforgivable, as this article is narrow in focus. Only dealing with a small segment and is three years old.
Newer news:

Overall, the Rhodium Group report suggests that direct building-related emissions—including natural gas burned onsite for heating and cooking—increased by about 10 percent last year, hitting their highest levels since 2004.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/u-s-emissions-in-2018-saw-the-second-largest-spike-since-1996/

Transportation (28.9 percent of 2017 greenhouse gas emissions) – The transportation sector generates the largest share of greenhouse gas emissions.
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions

peteshonkwiler

A REM is a REM is a REM
Yea, though I walk through the boundaries of containment, I shall fear no dose, for my meters are with me.  My counters, air sample filters, and smears, they comfort me.

Marlin

Quote from: Atomic Archeologist on Jun 23, 2019, 05:08
This article is the type that makes staticians look bad. Maybe I missed the reference mark of what the dropping emissions was measured against, but was it per gigawatt generation of all electric power production, carbon generation power production, or simply U S.A. emissions in total?

Quote from: Atomic Archeologist on Jun 24, 2019, 01:45
My bad for skimming the article. But, I probably already has a bias, unforgivable, as this article is narrow in focus. Only dealing with a small segment and is three years old.
Newer news:

Overall, the Rhodium Group report suggests that direct building-related emissions—including natural gas burned onsite for heating and cooking—increased by about 10 percent last year, hitting their highest levels since 2004.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/u-s-emissions-in-2018-saw-the-second-largest-spike-since-1996/

Transportation (28.9 percent of 2017 greenhouse gas emissions) – The transportation sector generates the largest share of greenhouse gas emissions.
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions

Speaking of statistics a one year spike compared to an average over a period of time is a bit deceptive. The ten year graph shows some increases as well.

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."

- Mark Twain


Somewhat applicable is another Mark Twain quote.




"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."


[2cents]   [devious]


Marlin


Marlin


atomicarcheologist

Quote from: Marlin on Jun 24, 2019, 02:11
Speaking of statistics a one year spike compared to an average over a period of time is a bit deceptive. The ten year graph shows some increases as well.

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."

- Mark Twain


Somewhat applicable is another Mark Twain quote.




"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."
Awe

[2cents]   [devious]


Pretty amazing that transportation still leads in emissions. Especially when we've been forced into ethanol blending for decades and this was to solve our problems. But it still leads, now we are to believe that gas turbines are the answer with nuclear power plants being a sacrificial financial aspect in order to a accomplish this.  🤭

Marlin

Quote from: Atomic Archeologist on Jun 26, 2019, 09:41
Pretty amazing that transportation still leads in emissions. Especially when we've been forced into ethanol blending for decades and this was to solve our problems. But it still leads, now we are to believe that gas turbines are the answer with nuclear power plants being a sacrificial financial aspect in order to a accomplish this.  🤭

Saving Nukes is a short term fix. Even if the US managed zero emissions CO2 would still climb globally because of emerging nations (China, India, etc.) Best option for the future in my opinion is a Hydrogen economy which would put Nukes up front again with newer generations of plants. I have not heard anything in a while about the nuke to be built in Idaho with the primary purpose of producing hydrogen, Bush administration I think so it has been a while.

My  [2cents]

atomicarcheologist

Quote from: Marlin on Jun 26, 2019, 09:34
Saving Nukes is a short term fix. Even if the US managed zero emissions CO2 would still climb globally because of emerging nations (China, India, etc.) Best option for the future in my opinion is a Hydrogen economy which would put Nukes up front again with newer generations of plants. I have not heard anything in a while about the nuke to be built in Idaho with the primary purpose of producing hydrogen, Bush administration I think so it has been a while.

My  [2cents]
There is no long term fix.
It was during Obama's term, and doesn't require a Special Hydrogen Accumulating Reactor Evolution (SHARE🤣).

Khamis said scientists and economists at IAEA and elsewhere are working intensively to determine how current nuclear power reactors — 435 are operational worldwide — and future nuclear power reactors could be enlisted in hydrogen production.

https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/pressroom/newsreleases/2012/march/nuclear-power-plants-can-produce-hydrogen-to-fuel-the-hydrogen-economy.html

But, nukes are the way to go to have plenty of power with minimal acreage, in order to mininize CO2 production.

peteshonkwiler

A REM is a REM is a REM
Yea, though I walk through the boundaries of containment, I shall fear no dose, for my meters are with me.  My counters, air sample filters, and smears, they comfort me.

tagline



NukeWorker ™ is a registered trademark of NukeWorker.com ™, LLC © 1996-2025 All rights reserved.
All material on this Web Site, including text, photographs, graphics, code and/or software, are protected by international copyright/trademark laws and treaties. Unauthorized use is not permitted. You may not modify, copy, reproduce, republish, upload, post, transmit or distribute, in any manner, the material on this web site or any portion of it. Doing so will result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law.
Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | Code of Conduct | Spam Policy | Advertising Info | Contact Us | Forum Rules | Password Problem?