The American Spectator

frost| 3.11.09 @ 7:12AM

Oh, that the aforementioned Grande Finale might be true?
But, gotta figure in at least a dozen years of suits and protests by the Sierra Club types of uber-greenies to sloooow down the process (if not totally derail same) - - remember how they blocked Prudhoe Bay oil drilling back in the 70's? Their protests of these years are probably more "refined" and better funded, and more "efficient" too, God forbid.
Won't hold my breath on this one...

Paul Petersen| 3.11.09 @ 8:16AM

At some point the government will have to have new laws for the review and permitting process that preempts the courts involvement to thwart the Greenies and NIMBYS.
Also the folks at Arriva have to be turned loose on their reclaim project to start chewing through all the spent fuel rods and the sites now that ZeroBama iced the Yucca Mt. Repository.
Nuclear and Hydro are the only base load zero carbon methods as we have today or will for a long time into the future.

Mike| 3.11.09 @ 8:41AM

I'd like to think Tucker is correct, but the anti-nuclear sentiment is still amazingly strong. I live in perhaps the "greenest" town in Vermont (Charlotte) with what has to be the highest per capita population of Global Warmist loons in the country, and yet the most popular referendum at town meeting day was shutting down Vermont Yankee, the state's only nuke. This despite the propect of a significant increase in carbon emmisions and a 40% rate hike to boot. The mindlessness is stunning!

whiterb| 3.11.09 @ 9:06AM

Soon we will be told that freeing in winter is good, that sweltering in summer is good, that wearing unwashed clothes is good- it all leads to longevity, higher intelligence, better sex, you name it. The benefits of cold showers ? Endless. The people in Vermont will buy every word of it. The question is where else will they buy it? There will be studies, and the network news people will solemnly present the evidence. This is al part of " changing science". If you disbelieve you will be proclaimed evil or an imbecile .

Son Of Sam| 3.11.09 @ 10:09AM

Nuclear will revive when the ObamaNazis unconditionally surrender. We need to attack them by any means necessary, including public confrontations, running our candidates in every Democrat primary to chew up their campaign funds and lawsuits when people start dying of heat exhaustion because the GOVERNMENT decided when and for how long they can have their air conditioning on. For that matter, we should be finding some way of suing all the tree-hugging, job-killing ecofreak criminal conspiracies like the Sierra Club right now. Shake off the slave mentality and GO AFTER THEM!

Son Of Sam
http://www.geocities.com/samadamssos

Thomas| 3.11.09 @ 10:51AM

A nice fantasy, but not very likely. In the first place, as Mr. Tucker noted, nuclear powerplant construction has to overcome the coal lobby hurdle. As use as fuel for powerplants is not only the largest use for coal in this country, but virtually the only significant use for it, do not expect the coal producers to roll over and play dead. Next, as frost and most of the other posters noted, the Green Weenies are still running amok through the federal courts and the halls of the EPA. As much as they hate oil, gas and coal, they are terrified of nuclear power and will never give up the fight against it willingly.

As more people use more energy and our ability to generate it remains stagnant, at best, public outcry will force relaxation of restrictions against new plant construction. But that may be too little too late. It takes three years to build a nuclear plant and almost as long to build a conventionally fired plant, even without the environmental red-tape and lawsuits.

This country has gone seriously astray over the last six decades. It used to be that if there was a shortage of power, investors would build a plant to generate more. Now, we just huddle in the dark. Sad.

cdc| 3.11.09 @ 11:32AM

The washer/dryer scenario is the most easily understood scenario; but I'd bet that, like with most technologies, more applications would quickly be found.
Primetime TV might be worth X cents per kilwatt but at Y cents maybe a book is more tempting. More information lets people make better decisions, and when it is built into the system, new systems develop to exploit it.
Heck maybe hybrid houses are the way to go. A storage battery in the basement so I can buy cheap and use high.
But maybe that's just me, one of those cheap jerks who doesn't go around buying cars and houses I can't afford and whining when the bill comes due.
But I'm still pro nuke; as long as that doesn't mean a whole bunch of subsidies for construction and waste disposal.

Liberty or Death| 3.11.09 @ 5:41PM

I agree with the posters who have written about the Eco-Kook community. They are Obama's voting base. Anyone in the Obama administration suggesting we go nuclear, would be akin to immediate job suicide. As much as Obama would like to stand before America and proclaim he alone defeated the energy crisis, I do not believe he has the stones to pick the obvious choice of nuclear. More than likely we will continue the idiocy of solar, biofuels and wind, with a side order of "smart grid" and ever-increasing regulations on automakers to provide "greener" vehicles.

Several years later... Obama would be gleeful with most Americans commuting via light-rail, or driving go carts, with lawnmower engines. He'll declare victory over energy and the media will parrot him.

Obama going nuclear might happen. Heck, he got elected with zero experience, a pocket full of American-hating friends, and "hope and change" as his "official" policy. Anything is possible.

Chemman| 3.11.09 @ 6:32PM

cdc: the options for batteries in the basement already exist besides a bank of batteries you would need a charge controller and inverter to convert AC/DC electricity plus an automatic disconnect from the grid when the blackout comes or your backup system won't work.
Most of the technologies the greenies hype are in the category of hope. For the greenies do me a favor an live off Grid with the technologies you are claiming will work. Once you have to give up all the luxuries you have become use to maybe you will become more rational.
BTW I practice what I'm asking of you. I own a renewable energy system to run my house. I am completely off Grid.

Brittanicus| 3.11.09 @ 7:22PM

Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) joined nefarious ranks of certain democrats, to strip E-Verify from both the Stimulus and Omnibus bills. All 50 took the Oath of office to protect the American People, but as we have seen they have intentionally engineered a portal, so ILLEGAL ALIENS can steal jobs from US Workers. This was carried out mostly behind closed doors, but this time THE PEOPLE will be made aware of where their loyalty lies.

REMEMBER THESE NAMES..?

Sen.Harry Reid (D-NV) arch enemy of American workers, committed the ultimate sin today Reid and 49 Democrats blocked E-Verify in the Senate. Their disloyal actions shall be well remembered, when the grovel for re-election. They condemned hundreds of thousands in the construction industry, having to compete over jobs. Parasites are organisms that live of a host and that is what contractors will do, when they look for the cheapest labor they can find. Starting with the stimulus, then followed by the Omnibus spending plan this Senators blocked E-Verify.

Akaka (D-HI) Inouye (D-HI),Begich (D-AK),Bennet (D-CO) Udall (D-CO),Bingaman (D-NM) Udall(D-NM),Boxer (D-CA) Feinstein (D-CA),Brown (D-OH),Burris (D-IL) Durbin (D-IL),Byrd (D-WV) Rockefeller (D-WV),Cantwell (D-WA) Murray,(D-WA),Cardin (D-MD) Mikulski (D-MD),Carper (D-DE) Kaufman (D-DE),Casey (D-PA),Conrad (D-ND) Dorgan (D-ND),Dodd (D-CT) Lieberman.

Here's more Senators who killed E-Verify Here's more (ID-CT),Feingold (D-WI) Kohl (D-WI),Gillibrand (D-NY) Schumer (D-NY),Hagan (D-NC),Harkin (D-IA),Johnson (D-SD),Kerry (D-MA),Landrieu (D-LA),Shaheen (D-NH),Leahy (D-VT) Sanders (I-VT),Levin (D-MI) Stabenow (D-MI),Lincoln (D-AR) Pryor (D-AR),Menendez (D-NJ) Lautenberg (D-NJ),Merkley (D-OR) Wyden (D-OR),Nelson (D-FL),Reed (D-RI) Whitehouse (D-RI),Reid (D-NV) and Warner (D-VA).

They sold the American Worker out for campaign money from corporate lobbyists and open border fanatics. In this miserable time of unemployment and uncertainty from the janitor, to the computer programmer you will be REMEMBERED. You will not escape your insult to the American worker, who depends on your honesty to vote on their behalf. You have now proved the dimensions of how far you will go, to keep the illegal alien invasion crossing our borders, overstaying their ship or plane visa.

The corruption so deeply instilled in the Washington elite. ASK JUDICIALWATCH? The billions of tax dollars taken from every, man, woman and child, to support the welfare of illegal aliens. Like Pearl harbor we will not forget the traitors who swore to uphold their allegiance to THE PEOPLE.

Steve| 3.11.09 @ 9:26PM

Smart Grid does not reduce electric energy consumption. It's only to reduce the peak demand to reduce the required on-line generation capacity. This has the added benifit of reducing energy loss in transmision and distribution of electricity.

Spooner| 3.12.09 @ 2:17AM

Forget about turning off the air conditioner for 10 minutes each hour, have you stayed at modern hotels lately? During summer months they have programs that shut down their air conditioning systems, but leave the fans running to move the air about, on a continuing basis for several hours. They do not resume air conditioning no matter what the room temperature until they have reached the time designated for resumprion of operation. This could easily be controlled via utilities under the smart grid concept.

Roy| 3.12.09 @ 5:12AM

If coal is "as powerfully entrenched as ever", why is it so easy for the globodoom lobby to strangle new coal plants in the cradle?

It is possible that by laying heavy stress on globodoom, this crowd can be persuaded to get out of the way of nuclear but not coal. But that's the issue. It doesn't matter what would be the best technical solution, what matters is what our master, Al Gore, will let us build.

John M| 3.12.09 @ 11:18AM

It would seem that the nuclear power option has been closed off for the foreseeable future and probably for as long as the Democrats stay in control in Washington, which from the way things look could be a very long time. Money for continued work on the nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain has been taken out of the budget, and no new nuclear power plants will be built without ensuring a permanent place to put the spent fuel, even if all the other regulatory hurdles could be circumvented. I agree with Manny that thorium power may be the best way to go for the all the reasons he cited. The reason it makes some people nervous is that I believe in the process, plutonium is produced, although this is used as fuel and gets thoroughly consumed. I am afraid that it will be left up to other countries, like India, to develop this technology.

mulus| 3.12.09 @ 4:54PM

Here in Missouri it likely that the funding problems will be worked out, and unit two will be built at Ameren's Reform, Mo. site. The public comment mtg.s were attended by locals who want to see it built, with a few token greens for color.

I had hoped Chu would set the China Syndrome crowd straight, but I don't see it happening any time soon.

I wonder if the Green Freedom Project out of Los Alamos will get more funding. What about those modular, mass produced reactors that MIT was working on? Fast breeders to burn up some of that `spent' fuel?

If Obama had really wanted to make a change he'd have cleared the regulatory thicket and started a massive build out across the nation. To replace carbon based energy sources on a terrawatt scale over a few decades requires a high base energy regime that nuclear alone can provide. And, if Obama is truely serious about caps, there is, indeed, only one path to travel that won't leave him in the dark.

The alternatives, at present, are boutique (and it is not as if the research hasn't been ongoing since the `70's).

joe.shuren, bouvet island| 3.12.09 @ 6:56PM

The marginal cost of intermittent peak power is always more than steady baseline power, as the extra generating capacity is not used most of the time. So any smart grid technology that provides this true cost to the consumer can encourage leveling of the load where it is possible and perhaps lengthen the time before capital has to be invested in new power plants and extra transmission lines. It is true that some of the electricity usage might be transfered to another time slot, but if consumers know the true cost then they can decide when to spend their money and might save both energy and money by consuming less as well. So some experimental tinkering with electric company rate plans might be a cheap way to conserve. States like Massachusetts regulate power companies and pay them to encourage conservation this way.

The "Compact City" theory of Dantzig posits maybe 20% savings by optimal leveling of space and time, although it needs to be updated by heat flow costs as air-conditioning might increase.

There is a paradox in smart grid for solar and wind. This would require new transmission lines from the favorable producing areas to the consuming areas. But those new lines would be used to transmit power from cheaper coal plants and so would be opposed by many environmentalists. Expect to see brownouts and blackouts in California this summer for this very reason.

You might say the smart grid is made necessary by solar and wind; if you site them in one place you need transmission lines, but if you distribute them on homes then those are not economical unless they feed surplus back into the grid. In southern China where the grid is not adequate many companies use diesel generators for peak load and grid inadequacies, and no smart grid would help there. Obviously solar and wind there are not steady enough for companies to produce efficiently, storage is not cost-effective, and hydro or geothermal not available options.

In Florida, Progress Energy plans 2 nuclear plants near the first one, then will tear down 2 coal plants at the first site. The environmentalists haven't geared up to delay the process yet. Stay tuned.

Rich Rostrom| 3.13.09 @ 12:06AM

Obama has just moved to kill the Yucca Mountain waste repository. While the U.S. nuclear industry can survive without Yucca Mountain , this is a serious blow to its future.

With nuclear power being strangled, and coal being suppressed for "carbon" evils, the U.S. will first have a power shortage, and then turn to massively increased use of natural gas. Which is no longer "cheap and abundant". In another decade the U.S. may find itself in the position of Europe: dependent on imported natural gas from Russia.

Jeff Eerkens| 3.13.09 @ 1:53AM

I have strongly supported president Obama up to now. But his political caving in to Harry Reid of Nevada is extremely disappointing and makes me and my colleagues start to loose faith in him. Opposition to Yucca is total insanity. It is based on fabrications, junk science, and irrational allegations made by anti-nuclear activists. While feigning to know all about radiation physics, reactors, and nuclear fuels, few have actually designed, built, or operated a reactor. Should Yucca be stopped, Nevada will loose a unique opportunity to be involved with the advanced nuclear cycle which will be part of all future prime energy generation. It will support thousands of high-tech jobs. I can not understand why some politicians listen to a handful of biased anti-nuclear lobbyists instead of some 200,000 professionals worldwide who have diligently studied energy engineering and who see a clear solution to the pending energy crisis. In the USA it means expanding our present fleet of 104 nuclear power plants to some 500 units by mid-century, when oil fields are exhausted. The motive is to save our children and grand-children from an economic catastrophe that will surely unfold if we don't carry out such a program. Nuclear fission waste amounts to one aspirin tablet per year per person using nuclear electricity, compared to tons of air pollutants and globe-warming gaseous CO2 emitted by coal or fossil-fuel combustion. Nuclear waste has been safely transported and stored by the US nuclear navy for half a century. Green nuclear power is the only practical solution to simultaneously (1) avoid dependence on foreign oil and gas, (2) overcome future oil and gas depletion, and (3) ameliorate global warming. Nevada's Yucca repository is essential for maintaining a successful nuclear power program. With proven fast breeder technology, uranium can provide global prime energy for 3000 years. Obama has a unique opportunity to become remembered as a leader who was able to re-orient the USA in the right direction and convince liberal Democrats they were wrong to oppose nuclear energy. I have (had?) great faith in him that he would shy away from lobbyists and listen to the real experts. Those obstructing nuclear power will be seen as irresponsible neo-luddites by future generations. Wind and solar are fine for small-quantity energy applications in selected locations but costs three times more than nuclear energy per delivered kWh. They can not support heavy industry and feed the vast fleets of future electric plug-in automobiles. Expensive energy storage systems are needed to store energy when the sun does not shine or the wind does not blow. Wind- and sand-storms, millions of acres, miles of maintenance roads, electric interconnects, and enormous ecosystem destruction (naturalist nightmares) are also big problems for large wind and solar farms. Relying on wind and solar energy without the accompaniment of a vigorous expansion of nuclear power will assuredly cause economic disaster and will taint the administration as irresponsible to our progeny. Opposing a practical program to rescue the USA from future energy-deprivation and economic collapse coincides with Bin Laden's objective to destroy our civilization. Some may not care and want to live in caves again, but most of us prefer today's comforts which America's settlers worked very hard to attain.

Jeff Eerkens, PhD
Adjunct research professor,
Nuclear Science & Eng'ng Institute,
U of Missouri - Columbia

Wedding Dresses| 9.10.09 @ 2:29AM

By seeing this article, I understandWedding Dresses
Designer Wedding Gowns
a lot, learned a lot of knowledge

groupshoes| 10.24.09 @ 3:01AM

Nice airtical, i would like to tell all of my friends about it. By the way, i would like to introduce everyone of you a very nice website, it offers cheap air max trainers for men and women. Such as Air max 1, air max 2, air max 90, nike air max 2009+, air max 2010 new, nike air max TN, nike air ltd trainers, air max 95. Dunk SB shoes, nike shox shoes. You can find almost all the nike series there, in huge collection and varies colorways. They have Latest style and classic style. Though their price are low, don't worry about it's quality. They are realll ones!!! I have bought from them for so many times, and very satisfied with the their goods and service. Come on, you'll love it.