Wisconsin OKs $1 billion nuclear plant sale to FPL Energy
Join the discussion below, or Read more at South Florida Sun-Sentinel.
#1 Sep 18, 2007
Well at least I know the money we are being overcharged is not going into someones pockets
#2 Sep 18, 2007
PEOPLE SHOULD THINK TWICE ABOUT HAVING CHILDREN.
#3 Sep 18, 2007
And yet my electric bill continues to rise...
#4 Sep 19, 2007
As it should, unless you are substantially increasing your conservation efforts. But, if it is too expensive, you could always generate your own. Check our Real Goods up in Ukiah. I realize that Ukiah is up north, but they ship products as well.
#5 Sep 20, 2007
Nuke power = poision that last 10000 years , costs of this evil energy to produce is cancer and tainted water.
Billions of dollars spent on storage facilty that is a terrorist target!
look up Yucca Mountain and you will see what I mean!
#6 Sep 20, 2007
You should update your propaganda. The "evil" issues of the 70s have been dismissed. The technical issues have been resolved. The current waste cycle is on stall over the politics of fear.
#7 Sep 21, 2007
People actually pay for bottled water that has had radioactive elements added. Nuke power does take poison that lasts 10 billion years and converts it into poison that lasts 10,000 years. That is a reduction in poison. Coal plants take the same poison and just dump it directly into the atmosphere along with more dangerous poisons that kill at least 24,000 people each year. There is no evidence that any nuclear power plant in the US has ever caused even one case of cancer. On the other hand, there is substantial evidence that the doses received from US nuclear power plants are beneficial to health.
Only in your dreams would it be a terrorist target. There are thousands of real terrorist targets. If you are worried about terrorist, you should be killing them, not whining about them.
#8 Sep 21, 2007
what about all the Indians suffering and dying out west from the uranium mining , as far as I am concerned thats nuclear plants.
Nuclear power is the worst idea ever and the poison it produces is to volitaile for anyone to want it in their backyard.
You love it so much let them store some waste in your basement or garage...
No evidence it causes cancer? Guess settling out of court cures cancer.
The nuclear fuel cycle utilises large quantities of fossil fuel at all of its stages - the mining and milling of uranium, the construction of the nuclear reactor and cooling towers, robotic decommissioning of the intensely radioactive reactor at the end of its 20 to 40-year operating lifetime, and transportation and long-term storage of massive quantities of radioactive waste.
#9 Sep 21, 2007
A major review of the risks of radiation links nuclear pollution with increased rates of breast cancer and child leukaemia. This new assessment appears at a time when environmental groups are urging a reform of Euratom, the European nuclear energy treaty.
The present cancer epidemic is a result of pollution from nuclear energy and of exposures to global atmospheric weapons fallout, which peaked in the period 1959-63, according to a report from the European Committee of Radiation Risk (ECRR) published in January 2003. It estimates that radioactive releases up to 1989 have caused, or will eventually cause, the death of 65 million people world-wide.
Commenting on the report Dr Caroline Lucas, MEP (Greens/EFA, UK), said: "We have known for years that nuclear pollution, from nuclear power plants, reprocessing plants and from weapons, has been very damaging for human health. Only with the publication of this research do we see the full scale of the folly of the nuclear industry. This new research cites vast amounts of evidence such as the levels of breast cancer in women who were adolescent between 1957 and 1963 when nuclear weapons testing was at its peak."
The report uses a new risk assessment model developed over the last five years. This modelling system has been developed to predict and explain all the observations, from leukaemia clusters near nuclear sites to the effects of the Chernobyl disaster in the contaminated regions of Belarus and the Ukraine.
The ECRR findings are a direct challenge to the conventional methods of calculating risk of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). The ICRP had been widely criticised as being too close to the nuclear industry and lacking balance. ECRR is an international group of 30 independent scientists led by Dr Chris Busby (member of UK governmentís radiation risk committee and advisor to the Ministry of Defence on the use of depleted uranium) and Professor Alexey Yablokov (member of the Russian Academy of Sciences).
Dr Lucas says that these shocking new figures give the nuclear debate a renewed urgency. "People are dying - and continue to die - in their millions," she said.
Time to reform Euratom?
Friends of the Earth Europe are running a campaign calling for the abolishment of Euratom. They say that while virtually all the EUís institutions have developed and changed, The European Atomic Energy Community, or Euratom Treaty, founded in 1958, remains unaffected by the democratisation of the EU institutions and Treaties. Because it remains a "stand-alone" treaty to support a specific energy technology, it is difficult to make even limited and minor reform of the Euratom agency. The European Parliament has no authority on Euratom issues.
The Convention on the Future of Europe is in the process of developing a proposal for a new constitution for Europe. The intention is to streamline the institutions and legal base of the EU to enable it to function efficiently in the 21st Century. Friends of the Earth argue that the Euratom Treaty must be reviewed in this framework. A number of Member States, Members of the Convention and Members of the European Parliament have called for such a review.
Simultaneously, the European Commission has proposed to significantly increase the power of Euratom. It proposes to both extend the Euratom loan ceiling by a further Euro 2 billion, and to dramatically increase Euratomís powers to enable it to set nuclear safety standards and timetables for the disposal of nuclear waste. Despite widespread opposition, the Commission approved the proposals in January 2003, which will now be debated in the European Parliament and Council.
#10 Sep 21, 2007
Edward McGaffigan, Jr., the longest-serving member of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, has died after a long battle with skin cancer. He was 58. McGaffigan, a strong advocate for nuclear power, said the government should scrap its plan to store the country's nuclear waste at a site in Yucca Mountain, Nevada.
can you say KARMA!
#11 Sep 21, 2007
Last month President Bush received an unusual letter. It came from Edward McGaffigan, one of five commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)ó the agency that oversees the nuclear power industry.
"My life expectancy is limited," McGaffigan wrote. He explained that he was rapidly losing a battle with cancer, and that the search for his replacement should begin.
But McGaffigan is not stepping down immediately. He says he will keep coming to work as long as he is able to do the job.
"I think if I just stayed at home waiting to die wouldn't be a very good way to go," McGaffigan said. "I'm functional at the moment.... I should be able to decline for several months, and be functional for several months."
McGaffigan has worked at the NRC for over a decade. He is the longest-serving commissioner in the history of the NRC. His colleagues say he knows even obscure regulations by heart.
McGaffigan is like a general willing to die in his boots. He's had the NRC staff put together an obituary. And recently he's started speaking out about something he used to be professionally mute on: the United States plan to deal with nuclear waste. He says it's a failure.
"I have a limited time left," McGaffigan said. "And this is something that has bothered me for some time."
Waste is one of the major problems confronting nuclear power. The U.S. has spent billions of dollars on plans to store it under Yucca Mountain in Nevada. McGaffigan thinks that's unworkable.
It's not a bad site, he says. But Nevada has fought it. He thinks it's time to start over.
"We so ruined politics with the state of Nevada that we've never recovered. We're unlikely to recover," McGaffigan said. "You cannot impose things on sovereign states."
A Department of Energy official criticized McGaffigan for speaking out on the controversy. But there was an apology after the commissioner's medical condition was brought to light.
McGaffigan has been a public servant for three decades. He says he's never taken money from industry.
McGaffigan has held jobs on Capitol Hill, in the White House and at the embassy in Moscow. But if you go way back he did graduate work in physics. And he says if there was one thing he could convince people of about nuclear power it's that radiation is everywhere, and its risks should be kept in perspective.
"We self-irradiate ourselves at 40 millirems (a unit for measuring small doses of radiation) per year because of the potassium 40 we carry in our bodies. "[In] double beds, you know your spouse will irradiate you to about 2 or 3 millirems a year," McGaffigan said. "These are doses we actually regulate at. And I've always wondered, when people demand even tighter [nuclear] regulation, why they're not demanding that double beds be regulated or bananas be regulated or Brazil nuts be regulated."
McGaffigan is 58. His wife Peggy died of Huntington's disease some years ago. He says he boiled his life down to home and work when she got sick.
He has two children: son, Edward, and a daughter, Margaret. He coached their sports teams growing up. Margaret is now an intern at the NRC.
"When I'm at home on weekends, I am organizing. And it's what I do. I'm writing notes to my children, notes to my lawyer, notes to my accountant." McGaffigan said. "Whether I'm here or home, I tend to be working on paper. At home it's the wonders of tax returns. When I'm here, it's the wonders of Part 52 ó the new rule as to how we're going to license the new [nuclear] plants."
A dedicated civil servant, McGaffigan says he is living now the way he always has.
"I got a lot of the travel out my system early in my life," McGaffigan said. "There is a job to be done here. I'm good at it. And I'm good at it even when I'm tired, which I am."
#12 Sep 21, 2007
NRC Declines Security Boost for Nuclear Plants
by David Kestenbaum
Morning Edition, January 30, 2007 ∑ Fearing terrorism, activist groups have asked the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to strengthen safeguards at power plants. On Monday, the NRC decided not to require plants to build additional defenses.
#13 Sep 21, 2007
What about the coal miners who are suffering and dying of black lung disease? There are many more of them and it is certain that they are dying from the coal mining. There is some uncertainty about whether it was the mining or smoking that caused the suffering and deaths among uranium miners.
Then there are the people killed in coal mining accidents and accidents like the Buffalo Hollow accident. That is all in addition to the 24,000 people killed in the US EVERY YEAR by coal plant emissions.
Yet thousands of people are willing to have it in their backyards.
I would be happy to store one hundred times my share there.
Settling out of court is no evidence of anything. Such settlements are made to reduce the high costs of litigation.
Yet it still produces significantly less greenhouse gases than fossil plants and the nuclear waste is contained while it decays to benign elements. Coal plant cooling towers take exactly as much effort to build as nucleear power plant cooling towers. Building coal plants takes similar resources and almost all of the waste from coal plants does not ever decay away. The tons of radioactive coal plant waste that is spread directly into the air does eventually decay away. But the volume of both types of waste from a coal plant is hundreds of times greater than the waste from nuke plants. By the way, the lifetimes of nuke plants is now 40 to 80 years.
#14 Sep 21, 2007
McGaffigan is dead now. But why aren't we regulating double beds and ingestion of bananas and Brazil nuts?
#15 Sep 21, 2007
http://www.osti.gov/bridge/product.biblio.jsp... Try reading about how radioactivity can cause skin cancer. These are actual peer reviewed studies as oppossed to siting people like Caroline Lucas who does not actually do any of her own research but likes to cut and paste from studies done by credible researches. You don't believe in nuke power fine but bring some real peer reviewed data to the table to debate.
#16 Sep 21, 2007
What about all the Indians suffering and dying...??? Produce the evidence.
#17 Sep 21, 2007
Here's some news.... everything that is manufactured uses large quantities of fossil fuel at every stage. Why should nuclear components be an exception? The answer to that is simple: more nukes to replace coal, then the manufacturing of everything will be cleaner.
#18 Sep 21, 2007
The ECRR is not a respected group within the scientific community at large. Its "findings" are politically tainted by their association with Europe's Green Party, through which it tries to blame nuclear radiation for nearly everything and now "millions" of cancers. All it takes is to adhere to the no-threshold myth and extrapolate to zero dose (regardless that there is no such thing as zero dose). One thing about math models is they are only as truthful as the assumptions upon which they are based. If you don't like the outcome, just change the assumptions.
#19 Sep 21, 2007
Oops, correction to previous post. Should have said:... "millions" of UNREPORTED cancers.
#20 Sep 23, 2007
You can say it all you want, but it proves nothing. If radioactivity could cause skin cancer, it would be more likely that it would be caused by uranium released from coal plants, or airline travel.
Add your comments below
|Midwest Meteor: Where Did You Come From, Where ...||Feb '17||Johnniez||1|
|Making a Murderer (Dec '15)||Dec '16||Early||68|
|Vietnam draft dodger Myron marlett (Sep '16)||Sep '16||Stevie||1|
|Koch Brothers' Libertarians Hate Trump (Mar '16)||Mar '16||so you know||1|
|Stop the Mexican Illegal Alien Train (Mar '16)||Mar '16||Red Jackal||2|
|Who did do it? (Jan '16)||Jan '16||James Gray||4|
|Update 4:39 p.m.: Manitowoc zoo bear bites off ... (Mar '10)||Jan '16||Reporter||3|
Find what you want!
Search Two Rivers Forum Now
Copyright © 2017 Topix LLC