Should the U.S. Go Nuclear-Free?

Sep 20, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: The Motley Fool

For the second time since the Fukushima disaster and the third time in over 40 years, Japan is entirely nuclear-free.

Comments
1 - 2 of 2 Comments Last updated Sep 21, 2013
BDV

Atlanta, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Sep 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

No.
Solarman

La Quinta, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Sep 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

".....extended outages pushed wholesale power prices through the roof. For more than a year, South Cali prices clocked in 12% higher than North Cali as the area fired up expensive (and more polluting) alternatives to keep power pumping to Los Angeles and San Diego." All due to the closure of San Onofre. Now the question will be, how much will it cost the ratepayer to officially decommission the plant? Where's the "spent" fuel that's stored on site going to go? What about the containment buildings? The NRC has several applications for new nuclear plants in the works. None are of the type of technology that could use the old style nuclear plant "spent" fuel rods as fuel in the new reactor. No matter what technology one uses to generate power, the ratepayer will eventually have to pay for the decommissioning of the old plant. Has any of these "studies" taken into account the full "cradle to grave" costs of a nuclear plant to the ratepayers? It's the old Frahm oil filter commercial. " You can pay me now, or you can pay me later."

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••