LIPA explores new uses for Shoreham nuclear plant site

Full story: Newsday 110
The Shoreham plant, the $6-billion white elephant that has sat idle since its decommissioning in 1994 amid growing controversy over nuclear power, could again generate electricity. Full Story
First Prev
of 6
Next Last
John

Fergus Falls, MN

#103 Aug 23, 2008
It is true that for 15 to 20 years while the financing for construction is being paid for the generation cost per kWh might well exceed 8 cents. We don't do 80 year loans. The 60 years after the reactor is paid off will be low cost with only O & M costs. Those costs which includes fuel cost currently runs about 1.7 cents/kWh. If you average the all the costs over 80 years it is unlikely that another energy source will offer cheaper or safer energy.
Our economy can tolerate 5 cent/kWh. Fossil fuel in the future may break our economy. We must seek a clean and affordable energy alternative. The containment structure is sometimes referred to as a billion dollar dome. When there is an available dome and a need for more power it would seem to be a no brainer. Also there is likely transmission lines which may be upgraded more economically than all new construction. Its time to push the no-nukes aside. Turn about is fair play.
Just another moron

Springfield, PA

#104 Sep 2, 2008
Wow, looks like my internet sufing has shown me a nice little debate here.

I'm with all you guys who say people in the US need to start conserving energy and investing in renewable energy instead of looking to the same old solutions to fix a problem that has been decades in the making...
Wait WHAT???? Hold on a minute, heres how I see it, we need BOTH.

Wake up and smell the coffee, none of these alternatives are the panacea that people make them out to be, just like nuclear isn't a panacea either. If we just go straight wind/hydro/solar we will have really crappy power. Why? Because they don't have the capacity factor of nuclear. They could be our bread and butter but they need some support from a carbon free source (NOT biofuel, it still creates co2).

What else is there beside nuclear that is a constant source of energy that isn't atmospherically sensitive? Nothing, and not in time either. If ITER works, fusion may be on the horizon, but that is way too far out for us to put all our eggs in that basket. We need nuclear right now, because we didn't plan ahead when we should have.
So yes, nuclear power plants are expensive, and they are scary, but it is only because the public looks at them that way. Chernobyl was built WITHOUT a containment vessel and TMI was a long, long time ago. The instrumentation and controls just weren't as good back then. Your modern nuclear plant has far more sophisticated safety equipment than the old school ones did (and they were a marvel given the technology the engineers had to work with!). Some of this safety is even built into the reactor designs themselves, safety that is automatic, not manual. And the old plants have been updated with new safety systems too!

Why is it that anybody who is pro nuclear is usally okay with alt energy in the mix too, but so many people with alt energy on their minds are so vehemently anti nuclear they refuse to listen. Instead I see a lot of hair pulling and infighting and nothing gets done. We should be building nuclear plants AND wind/solar/hydro RIGHT NOW, not bickering about who's is better. But lets just spout the same tried and true debates from a decade or more ago (debates which don't hold a candle to new technology and the current state of affairs) and ignore a great technology that could help stop global warming. Yes, there is waste, but if done right it won't come into contact with the population, may be recyclable in the long run, and won't hurt the environment.
So, if they want to add a reactor to Shoreham, I say its ABOUT TIME they thought about it, and while they're at it, maybe they should add another one for good measure. If they want to put some solar and wind on the same site, even better!
Algernon Sidney

Dallas, TX

#105 Sep 5, 2008
Just another moron wrote:
I'm with all you guys who say people in the US need to start conserving energy and investing in renewable energy instead of looking to the same old solutions to fix a problem that has been decades in the making...
That started more than 30 years ago.
Reddy Kilowatt

Mclean, VA

#106 Sep 6, 2008
Just another moron wrote:
Why is it that anybody who is pro nuclear is usally okay with alt energy in the mix too, but so many people with alt energy on their minds are so vehemently anti nuclear they refuse to listen.
Ummm...because they're technological illiterates and anti-corporate idealogues?
Koz

Shippingport, PA

#107 Oct 15, 2008
Reddy Kilowatt wrote:
Ummm...because they're technological illiterates and anti-corporate idealogues?
bingo
FRITO BANDITO

Patchogue, NY

#108 Oct 15, 2008
Dave wrote:
Nuclear power while having no emissions has two major setbacks. One is the high cost of building a plan, partially because of all the safety features that have to be put it. It requires a large government subsidy to make these things economical. Secondly we still don't have a good solution to deal with the nuclear waste, unless you call burying it a random place surrounded by concrete and hoping it doesn't leak, a good solution. I strongly believe that we need an alternative to gas, oil, and coal. If LIPA puts any of these plants in over time prices are simply going to climb as NYS or the fed'l gov't places a cap-and-trade system. Long Island can really help lead the nation to a renewable energy future by placing a large photovoltaic power plant or windmill farm. Start-up costs are high but the continuing cost after that is minimal maintenance costs.
Know a guy who worked on construction there and he told me that concrete is sub-standard. When inspectors walked away conrete was watered down to get it flowing. Might wanna check it before putting nuc there.
Plum Island Park

Millbrook, NY

#109 Jan 17, 2009
FRITO BANDITO wrote:
<quoted text>
Know a guy who worked on construction there and he told me that concrete is sub-standard. When inspectors walked away conrete was watered down to get it flowing. Might wanna check it before putting nuc there.
Shoreham had so many flaws. If anyone checks the history you will learn not only were some of the flaws the reason for the huge cost overruns but also the reason many of the workers on the project said they were moving far away long before the plant would go full power. Welding certification tests were faked and the same test data was used over and over again. All the pipes were removed and replaced. Could you use it for something? Sure, but I doubt installing a new nuke would be easy or cheap. The old design is probably now obsolete anyway.

I have nothing against nuclear power but I think it must be constructed by private entities, located far away from dense urban areas, and a better plan to manage waste over the long term must be developed. If a group of investors feels they can manage and profit with such a facility, go for it. But it has to be regulated for safety, and security... and situations such as the corroded dome on that Ohio plant that was not noticed until it was almost too late cannot be allowed to occur.
Sqump

Irvington, NJ

#110 Mar 20, 2009
I didn't read all 107 comments so this may have been covered already, but if it weren't for us "liberals" then you too would be living on an island with no way off IF something were ever to go wrong. Nuke plants have a decent safety record nowadays and you don't hear about the depleted fuel shipments having accidents, but even a small oops would be devestating on an island. I wonder if the gov't and taxpayers invested those billions in the 70's on say solar on every roof on the island, how would things be now?
kenny

AOL

#111 Jun 1, 2009
Make it a sod field and than later you can build a PDD
Slow rate of change

Mesquite, NV

#112 Jun 2, 2009
Just like water, Long Island has a slow rate of change ? I don't know how the LIE or other HIGHWAYS were ever built there ?
May be by the year three thousnad they
will revert to Necular Energy.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 6
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Center Moriches Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Dans Horse dead farm (Aug '13) 6 hr Gay Holmes Guys b... 322
Victor and the N word 9 hr hoodo 8
Residents at Westhampton Care Center in Art Show Nov 23 pearl skelaney 1
Man injured in Mastic shooting (Sep '10) Nov 23 Doug 29
Sewer Systems Nov 23 PinkSatin 6
Guenter Wende-42 of Mastic arrested for murder ... (Dec '11) Nov 18 Lorraine Poillon 12
New rules on speaking are established at Mastic... Nov 18 Lorraine Poillon 1

Center Moriches News Video

Center Moriches Dating
Find my Match

Center Moriches People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Center Moriches News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Center Moriches

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 8:24 am PST

Bleacher Report 8:24AM
Jets Will Start Geno Rest of 2014
Bleacher Report10:10 AM
Sick Catch Boosts OBJ's Madden Rating
NBC Sports11:10 AM
Manish Mehta on poor job done by John Idzik
NBC Sports11:20 AM
Jaguars are the new perpetual underdogs
NBC Sports11:55 AM
Beckham has become Giants center of attention - NBC Sports