Jun 18, 2009

Why blog about nuclear power options with the Washington Post

From Washington Post
Government to Guarantee Loans for Nuclear Power Plants
The Energy Department is planning to award $18.5 billion in loan guarantees for the construction of new nuclear power plants to four utilities, government sources said today. The companies include UniStar Nuclear Energy, NRG Energy Inc., Scana Corp. and Southern Co.

Nuclear power advocates hope that the loan guarantees will help launch a new wave of nuclear power plants that use a new generation of technology; moreover, they note, nuclear plants do not emit greenhouse gases. But foes of nuclear power argue that the plants remain too expensive to build without federal assistance and that energy efficiency and renewable energy resources offer better alternatives. New plants could cost anywhere from $6 billion to $12 billion, industry executives say.

RE: What is your position on nuclear energy once more?
I have been asked by several readers why I am bringing up nuclear energy options again... Short answer - so we have 'sustainable options'.

I am trying to encourage 'good behavior' with billions of tax dollars... if we are 'dead set' on going forward on nuclear energy, we need to utilize the best available options and NOT the same mistakes that have plagued the industry for four decades (sounds like I am talking about health care or war in middle east).

Going forward with the most viable, economic nuclear energy options will not only save our own future, but will build a sustainable longterm future for the nuclear energy industry. The way we are going through fuel, mining, water resources while building 1,000 year bunkers of radioactive waste will not lead to this...

Longer answer - Understanding 'why' people could be 'for' current technology nuclear power options is confusing to say the ... and understand there is very little eviro or economic hope in its future without doing it very differently as I have covered before (fast bed gen 4 reactors that are decades off).

Like the 80's we will spend 10's of Billions over the next decade without getting a gigawatt of power out of any production... while our energy demand and cost become epic.

The financial expense alone will win any argument in today's economic environment and even 45 more plants will do nothing for our future. With the renewable electricity cost premium ranges from 0.1 cents per kWh to 0.2 cents per kWh we would have no reason for a higher price... (link source DOE)

The U.S. Consumer Price Index from 2000 to 2007 increased by a factor of 1.2, while in the same period the Power Capital Costs Index increased by a factor of 2.3. If one were to rely on general economy inflation rates, you would think a power plant that cost $1 billion to build in the Year 2000 would only cost $1.2 billion to build in 2007. However, CERA has noted the same power plant would actually cost $2.3 billion to build. Picking a realistic escalation rate is very important.

Simplest answer everyone ignores ...
Low Source and Traditional Geothermal - Unlimited and at 0.07 cents per kWh