Holy moly, they're finally gonna do it! $8.3b in loan guarantees for nuke plants

Jstas
Jstas Posts: 14,806
edited February 2010 in The Clubhouse
http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/02/16/obama-nuclear-loan.html


Shame a Canadian news source is the only one carrying the story as far as I could find.


Anyhow, the $8.3b is for loans. There is already something like $18.6b in budgeted money for new plants and an expected $36b in in additional funds to be named later this year.

The two new plants are being built in Burke County, Georgia by Southern Company.

Say what you will about nuke plants but they are a viable and sustainable alternative to oil and coal based energies. Aside from the waste material, they are quite safe and clean. I'm very happy to see this. It's about time someone finally did something significant about energy independence instead of just talking about it. Granted it's not a giant step but it is a solid step in a better direction.
Expert Moron Extraordinaire

You're just jealous 'cause the voices don't talk to you!
Post edited by Jstas on
«134

Comments

  • nadams
    nadams Posts: 5,877
    edited February 2010
    Our local plant got approval from the NRC for two new reactors to add to the two it has had since the 80's. It's a good thing for the area as long as all the fuel rods keep themselves in the building.
    Ludicrous gibs!
  • SolidSqual
    SolidSqual Posts: 5,218
    edited February 2010
    It won't happen. The EPA will tie it up and Obama will be able to say he tried.
  • John30_30
    John30_30 Posts: 1,024
    edited February 2010
    Say what you will about France, but they are miles ahead of everyone else in safe nuclear power & development.

    France nuclear

    # France derives over 75% of its electricity from nuclear energy. This is due to a long-standing policy based on energy security.

    # France is the world's largest net exporter of electricity due to its very low cost of generation, and gains over EUR 3 billion per year from this.

    Obama will say ( and rightly) if they can do it safely, we can do it safely.
  • nadams
    nadams Posts: 5,877
    edited February 2010
    John30_30 wrote: »
    Obama will say ( and rightly) if they can do it safely, we can do it safely.

    If only he hadn't cut funding for spent fuel storage.
    Ludicrous gibs!
  • nooshinjohn
    nooshinjohn Posts: 25,383
    edited February 2010
    SolidSqual wrote: »
    It won't happen. The EPA will tie it up and Obama will be able to say he tried.

    Agreed, it will never happen, but most of the money will be spent before that call is made. The plants will get to about 90% completion first, and billions will be spent taking care of the unions that will do the work and more millions will be made by the lawyers fighting to stop it. In the end the taxpayer will be reading by candle-light, and screwed once again.

    The failure of the plan will be blamed on the next administration and Obama will be absolved of any involvement, but his friends (SEIU)will reap BILLIONS!
    The Gear... Carver "Statement" Mono-blocks, Mcintosh C2300 Arcam AVR20, Oppo UDP-203 4K Blu-ray player, Sony XBR70x850B 4k, Polk Audio Legend L800 with height modules, L400 Center Channel Polk audio AB800 "in-wall" surrounds. Marantz MM7025 stereo amp. Simaudio Moon 680d DSD

    “When once a Republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil.”— Thomas Jefferson
  • NJPOLKER
    NJPOLKER Posts: 3,474
    edited February 2010
    SolidSqual wrote: »
    It won't happen. The EPA will tie it up and Obama will be able to say he tried.

    Precisely. You should give Glenn Beck a call. I'd love to see you on TV helping out this country.
  • Demiurge
    Demiurge Posts: 10,874
    edited February 2010
    SolidSqual wrote: »
    It won't happen. The EPA will tie it up and Obama will be able to say he tried.

    That's true, but it's even more devious than that. This is all about Cap & Tax (Trade):
    President Obama extends nuclear olive branch to GOP

    It’s not often President Barack Obama gets a shot at a political three-fer, but he did with Tuesday’s announcement of $8 billion in loan guarantees for two new nuclear plants in Georgia.

    It gave him a chance to talk about clean energy and creating jobs. But perhaps most importantly at this moment in his presidency, the nuke plants serve as an olive branch of sorts to a Republican leadership that has long backed domestic nuclear power.

    “We’ll have to build a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in America,” Obama declared during a visit to IBEW Local 26 Headquarters in Lanham, Md. “To meet our growing energy needs and prevent the worst consequences of climate change, we’ll need to increase our supply of nuclear power. It’s that simple.”

    Obama framed the issue of nuclear power as one area where the political left and right can come together, and in fact, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky has already cited nuclear power as one issue on which there can be bipartisan support.

    “Now, I know it has long been assumed that those who champion the environment are opposed to nuclear power,” Obama said. “But the fact is, even though we have not broken ground on a new nuclear plant in nearly 30 years, nuclear energy remains our largest source of fuel that produces no carbon emissions.”

    At the White House, aides said the announcement was designed to show that the president is looking for common ground with his Republican foes on Capitol Hill.

    “The President is making good on his offer to meet Republicans halfway,” a White House official said. “In the State of the Union and at the House Republican Conference retreat, the President made clear that he is willing to work with Republicans towards a comprehensive solution to our energy challenges.”

    But, the official emphasized, Obama expects cooperation from Republicans in his effort to make sure that companies pay a higher cost for emitting carbon pollution, one of the key concepts of his stalled cap-and-trade energy plan.

    “Republicans who advocate for nuclear power have to recognize that we will not achieve a big boost in nuclear capacity unless we also create a system of incentives to make clean energy profitable,” the official said. “As long as producing carbon pollution carries no costs, plants that burn fossil fuel will be more cost-effective than nuclear plants.”

    The loan guarantees will support the construction of two new nuclear reactors at an existing plant in Burke, Ga., the White House said. Officials said the project will include approximately 3,500 construction jobs and 800 permanent operations jobs and will provide power to about 550,000 residential homes.

    Nuclear energy has long been controversial in this country — since the disaster at Three Mile Island in the 1970s showed that reactors can pose a threat to people living nearby. That’s one reason why Obama chose his words carefully on Tuesday, twice referring to “safe, clean” nuclear power.

    The president also highlighted a provision of his budget that calls for tripling loan guarantees for new reactors.

    Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0210/33037.html#ixzz0fo190Vq8

    I wish he was actually serious about nuclear power, but it appears he's more interested in killing businesses.
  • Polk user
    Polk user Posts: 311
    edited February 2010
    Agreed, it will never happen, but most of the money will be spent before that call is made. The plants will get to about 90% completion first, and billions will be spent taking care of the unions that will do the work and more millions will be made by the lawyers fighting to stop it. In the end the taxpayer will be reading by candle-light, and screwed once again.

    The failure of the plan will be blamed on the next administration and Obama will be absolved of any involvement, but his friends (SEIU)will reap BILLIONS!



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoreham_Nuclear_Power_Plant
  • mhardy6647
    mhardy6647 Posts: 33,727
    edited February 2010
  • Jstas
    Jstas Posts: 14,806
    edited February 2010
    I don't read the NYT.
    Expert Moron Extraordinaire

    You're just jealous 'cause the voices don't talk to you!
  • xj4094dg
    xj4094dg Posts: 1,158
    edited February 2010
    John30_30 wrote: »
    Say what you will about France, but they are miles ahead of everyone else in safe nuclear power & development.

    France nuclear

    # France derives over 75% of its electricity from nuclear energy. This is due to a long-standing policy based on energy security.

    # France is the world's largest net exporter of electricity due to its very low cost of generation, and gains over EUR 3 billion per year from this.

    Obama will say ( and rightly) if they can do it safely, we can do it safely.

    Agreed. The key to the success of the French system is continuity. Each plant is made exactly the same. What you find in one plant, you'll find in all of their plants. This keeps the costs down, simplifies maintenance and eliminates the risk of "one-off" designs melting down.

    Nuclear is the way to go for sure.
    "The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it." Neil deGrasse Tyson.
  • Polkersince85
    Polkersince85 Posts: 2,883
    edited February 2010
    This reactor will be built. The site is about 20 miles from Augusta, Ga. We already have one reactor at the site run by Georgia Power. It has been in the works for years and is shovel ready. This area is very pro nuclear with the existing reactor and that little place called Savannah River Site where the Plutonium is produced. Big deal in this area. It's just a shame they won't build any in California where they need it bad.

    The construction will produce 2K-3K jobs with 800+ to run the thing. When they built the first one there in the 70's, it was a big help to the area. Within a 50 mile radius of Augusta, we have Fort Gordon, the NSA, SRS, GA. Power reactor(s), medical collage, and a lot of thriving industry. Housing prices have held and unemployment in the area is a lot better than the rest of the country. Things are looking up around here. Stay tuned.
    >
    >
    >This message has been scanned by the NSA and found to be free of harmful intent.<
  • tonyb
    tonyb Posts: 32,952
    edited February 2010
    Also agree, and also agree the tree huggers will slow down the process. Funny though, Obama has been against nuclear,against offshore drilling, and now the sudden turn ? Maybe because he has no friggin' idea on how to help small buisness's get going again. I smell a rat. A trojan horse if you will. We have to see how this plays out, but I'm all for it if he can make it happen. Thing is for me anyway, to not spend any more billions and just take it out of the hundreds of billions still unspent in the stimulus bill....that isn't working.
    HT SYSTEM-
    Sony 850c 4k
    Pioneer elite vhx 21
    Sony 4k BRP
    SVS SB-2000
    Polk Sig. 20's
    Polk FX500 surrounds

    Cables-
    Acoustic zen Satori speaker cables
    Acoustic zen Matrix 2 IC's
    Wireworld eclipse 7 ic's
    Audio metallurgy ga-o digital cable

    Kitchen

    Sonos zp90
    Grant Fidelity tube dac
    B&k 1420
    lsi 9's
  • obieone
    obieone Posts: 5,077
    edited February 2010
    SolidSqual wrote: »
    It won't happen. The EPA will tie it up and Obama will be able to say he tried.

    Exactly the same tactic he's using for healthcare;)

    It'll NEVER happen:rolleyes:
    I refuse to argue with idiots, because people can't tell the DIFFERENCE!
  • treitz3
    treitz3 Posts: 18,994
    edited February 2010
    This reactor will be built.
    I believe you are right. I saw a snippet on one of the major news networks last night.

    There's nothing wrong with a nuclear power plant. I live by one and I have no drain bamage. ;)
    ~ In search of accurate reproduction of music. Real sound is my reference and while perfection may not be attainable? If I chase it, I might just catch excellence. ~
  • brettw22
    brettw22 Posts: 7,624
    edited February 2010
    you poor lil boys with your victim trodden lives..........Obama will be just fine even with as much as you want to puff out your chests against anything he says/does......
    comment comment comment comment. bitchy.
  • ben62670
    ben62670 Posts: 15,969
    edited February 2010
    Glad to see all the troops coming home and not as going out:rolleyes:
    Please. Please contact me a ben62670 @ yahoo.com. Make sure to include who you are, and you are from Polk so I don't delete your email. Also I am now physically unable to work on any projects. If you need help let these guys know. There are many people who will help if you let them know where you are.
    Thanks
    Ben
  • brettw22
    brettw22 Posts: 7,624
    edited February 2010
    cuz that's something you actually want to happen......only are y'all bitching about sending troops when it's not someone like W sending them out.......no worries ben.....everyone knows that what will be bitched about by you people is exactly a 180 of what's done, even if it's something that's usually done by your team.....shocker.
    comment comment comment comment. bitchy.
  • nooshinjohn
    nooshinjohn Posts: 25,383
    edited February 2010
    brettw22 wrote: »
    cuz that's something you actually want to happen......only are y'all bitching about sending troops when it's not someone like W sending them out.......no worries ben.....everyone knows that what will be bitched about by you people is exactly a 180 of what's done, even if it's something that's usually done by your team.....shocker.
    WTF dude.....
    The Gear... Carver "Statement" Mono-blocks, Mcintosh C2300 Arcam AVR20, Oppo UDP-203 4K Blu-ray player, Sony XBR70x850B 4k, Polk Audio Legend L800 with height modules, L400 Center Channel Polk audio AB800 "in-wall" surrounds. Marantz MM7025 stereo amp. Simaudio Moon 680d DSD

    “When once a Republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil.”— Thomas Jefferson
  • brettw22
    brettw22 Posts: 7,624
    edited February 2010
    ben wanted a response.......he usually does when he makes the type of comments like he tends to make......all good......
    comment comment comment comment. bitchy.
  • Polkersince85
    Polkersince85 Posts: 2,883
    edited February 2010
    Just in case someone wants to take credit for this project, here's an article from local paper on the new plant to be built from 2006. The land has already been cleared. IIRC, this was before a certain Senator was even elected to 1st term office. :confused:

    http://chronicle.augusta.com/stories/2006/10/18/bus_100922.shtml
    >
    >
    >This message has been scanned by the NSA and found to be free of harmful intent.<
  • schwarcw
    schwarcw Posts: 7,335
    edited February 2010
    While building nuclear power plants in the US effectively stopped after Three Mile Island, the rest of the world continued to build safe and economical nuclear plants using US technology. France, Japan and Korea generate more electricty from nuclear power than any other source. France produces about 60 - 70%, Japan 80%, Korea about the same. All of these plants use US technology licensed from Westinghouse or General Electric. These countries produce cheap, safe and environmentally clean electricity. This electricity fuels their economies. China is just starting to build a new generation of nuclear plants that are even safer. Cheap electricity is what fuels economies. Just last month the United Arab Emirates signed a contract to build four nuclear plants using Korean companies who have licensed US nuclear technology. New nuclear plant build plants are on the drawing boards in the UK, South Africa, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Turkey, Italy, Spain, all based on US technology. The Russians are expanding their nuclear generation capacity both domestically and in the Eastern European block and of course Iran.

    Americans need to wake up. Nuclear Power has never been a real technical problem, but it is a significant political problem in the US.

    The majority of US nuclear opponents couldn't tell you who lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., but they could easily tell you who lives in a pineapple under the sea.

    What about the spent fuel you ask? All the other countries in the world chemically reprocess it and generate more fuel.
    Carl

  • AsSiMiLaTeD
    AsSiMiLaTeD Posts: 11,726
    edited February 2010
    There are lots of ideas out there for energy generation. I'm actually surprised that more people aren't talking about nuclear FUSION, as opposed to the fission based reactors that the plants are built on today.

    Fusion is obviously much more difficult to figure out because of heat containment, but surely with all the brainpower on this planet we can get it figured out...
  • nooshinjohn
    nooshinjohn Posts: 25,383
    edited February 2010
    schwarcw wrote: »
    The majority of US nuclear opponents couldn't tell you who lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., but they could easily tell you who lives in a pineapple under the sea.

    I agree 100+ with your post, except for this. It is their guy that sits in the big chair now. They even made a Chia Pet to honor the occasion. They know who he is.:p
    The Gear... Carver "Statement" Mono-blocks, Mcintosh C2300 Arcam AVR20, Oppo UDP-203 4K Blu-ray player, Sony XBR70x850B 4k, Polk Audio Legend L800 with height modules, L400 Center Channel Polk audio AB800 "in-wall" surrounds. Marantz MM7025 stereo amp. Simaudio Moon 680d DSD

    “When once a Republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil.”— Thomas Jefferson
  • Demiurge
    Demiurge Posts: 10,874
    edited February 2010
    Just in case someone wants to take credit for this project, here's an article from local paper on the new plant to be built from 2006. The land has already been cleared. IIRC, this was before a certain Senator was even elected to 1st term office. :confused:

    http://chronicle.augusta.com/stories/2006/10/18/bus_100922.shtml

    When there are two new nuclear reactors built in GA and we don't have crap and tax legislation passed to make it happen I'll eat my shoe.

    How many nuclear reactors were abandoned between 1970 and 1980? The answer to that question shows you why it's incredibly naive to think GA or any other state will be getting new nuclear reactors built anytime soon. Also considering how much more hypersensitive we are now than even back then.

    Like it or not, what to do with nuclear waste is a political problem.

    I hope they build them with no strings attached and then some.
  • xj4094dg
    xj4094dg Posts: 1,158
    edited February 2010
    The biggest hurdle we face here is nobody wants these to built by the other team. They will be seen in the future as reasonable and successful ventures. One side would never want to see the other side take credit for a successful energy project of any kind. This kind idiocy is preventing us as a country from moving forward on almost everything, no matter which side the aisle you squat.

    It sucks at best.
    "The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it." Neil deGrasse Tyson.
  • schwarcw
    schwarcw Posts: 7,335
    edited February 2010
    Demiurge wrote: »
    When there are two new nuclear reactors built in GA and we don't have crap and tax legislation passed to make it happen I'll eat my shoe.

    The plants have been under construction for more than a year. Westinghouse has had a contract for two years, hundreds of millions have been spent ordering equipment. The people of Georgia are welcoming this plant. It is being built next to two units that have been operating for 20 years.
    Carl

  • Demiurge
    Demiurge Posts: 10,874
    edited February 2010
    schwarcw wrote: »
    The plants have been under construction for more than a year. Westinghouse has had a contract for two years, hundreds of millions have been spent ordering equipment. The people of Georgia are welcoming this plant. It is being built next to two units that have been operating for 20 years.

    Yeah, and? I've read the story.

    Re-read my post.

    "When there are two new nuclear reactors built in GA and we don't have crap and tax legislation passed to make it happen I'll eat my shoe."

    It doesn't matter what the people of Georgia want, because if it mattered what the people of a state wanted there would be more energy producing nuclear facilities popping up and operating all over the United States. There aren't because one political party by and large doesn't want them and the environmental nuts protest like hell against them (oddly, considering how clean nuclear power is).
  • hearingimpared
    hearingimpared Posts: 21,137
    edited February 2010
    brettw22 wrote: »
    you poor lil boys with your victim trodden lives..........Obama will be just fine even with as much as you want to puff out your chests against anything he says/does......

    I bet your car only makes left turns!:D:p
  • nooshinjohn
    nooshinjohn Posts: 25,383
    edited February 2010
    xcapri79 wrote: »
    If you want nuclear power - you want State socialism. You can't have it both ways.

    If you had a clue as to what you speak about, it would be a miracle.:rolleyes:
    The Gear... Carver "Statement" Mono-blocks, Mcintosh C2300 Arcam AVR20, Oppo UDP-203 4K Blu-ray player, Sony XBR70x850B 4k, Polk Audio Legend L800 with height modules, L400 Center Channel Polk audio AB800 "in-wall" surrounds. Marantz MM7025 stereo amp. Simaudio Moon 680d DSD

    “When once a Republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil.”— Thomas Jefferson