Skip to main content

View Diary: Court to Vermont: "Drop Dead" (200 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I'm not sure I understand (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Joieau, asterkitty, shaharazade

    your first question.  Why does it matter what the cost of electricity is or how it compares with other sources?  Is your argument that if it's cheap, the plant should be kept open?

    Because if that is really your argument - i.e. cheaper is better irrespective of why it is cheaper - it severely conflicts with your signature.

    Furthermore, I can't get my head wrapped around your statement that people in Vermont have been "crying wolf over VY for nearly 4 decades."  Considering that this reactor is a clone of Fukushima and no one expected what happened at Fukushima to ever happen (except for the anti-nuke folks that you're so keen to denigrate), how exactly is that "crying wolf?"

    All I see you doing here is apologizing for the nuclear industry.  Do you have some vested interest in the nuclear industry or are you apologizing for the nuclear industry free-lance?  I really don't understand why you are here trying to marginalize very real and empirical concerns about nuclear safety.

    Arrrr, the laws of science be a harsh mistress. -Bender B. Rodriguez

    by democracy inaction on Tue Jan 24, 2012 at 08:52:11 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Not a clone. I'ts been upgraded to Mk II (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      NYFM

      and has more safety systems than Fukushima ever did, in fact, it's better than the upgraded Fukushima Denai plant that did not suffer a meltdown despite being with the same wave.

      The fast is that the faster we can build Gen III reactors that have walk-away safety passive cooling, the better we will be and we can begin phasing out these Gen II BWRs like VY. They should build two brand new AP1000s on the same site and end this discussion.

      Now...a HUGE fight over wind is still going on, splitting the anti-nuke forces as big energy companies impose wind on the mountain ridges with farms and townfolks now in hugely passionate opposition to wind. Rich liberals want to see wind grow in Vermont, it appears wind, which rips up moutain tops and millions of tons of top soil to build roads, has these Green Mountain Boys up in ire against Green Mountain Energy.

      Dr. Isaac Asimov: "The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny ...'"

      by davidwalters on Tue Jan 24, 2012 at 11:02:17 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The farmers here (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Russgirl

        in Eastern Oregon like the wind and helped get them past the Air Forces opposition. You are a nuke guy right? Fukushima has really made it harder to push nukes, with any credibility, let alone plants like this one that are way past their expiration date. That picture alone makes it clear that this should be closed. Talk about insanity, after what happened in Japan why should anybody be on the side of this dangerous and lethal method of energy.      

        •  it hasn't really stopped any new builds except in (0+ / 0-)

          Japan itself and even that is open to question. After Japan? You mean the doubling off GHG emissions since they closed more of their nukes? Or Germany's? I wonder. The world generally understands that most of the world is not subject to tsunamis; that nuclear provides baseload carbon-free energy and that to oppose it means relying on natural gas other other fossil fuels.

          In Vermont farmers are increasingly opposed to wind, it seems.

          Dr. Isaac Asimov: "The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny ...'"

          by davidwalters on Tue Jan 24, 2012 at 01:52:17 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Bullsh*t (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Russgirl
            The world generally understands that most of the world is not subject to tsunamis; that nuclear provides baseload carbon-free energy and that to oppose it means relying on natural gas other other fossil fuels.
            What is it with all the nuclear industry apologists here?  That is pure, unadulterated bullshit.

            Most of the world may not be subject to tsunamis but a tsunami is not the only natural disaster that can cause the same kind of unexpected devastation like what happened at Fukushima.  An earthquake can cause the same or worse damage and there isn't a place on this earth that doesn't shake from time to time.  There isn't a place on this earth that lightning doesn't strike from time to time or that doesn't suffer other severe weather anomolies from time to time.

            Nuclear sounds great the way you talk it up, with all the "baseload carbon-free energy" jargon, except nuclear is not all upside as you imply.  There is the small matter of nuclear waste.  With fossil fuels, there is only so much we can pull out of the ground.  With nuclear, there is only so much waste that we can put into the ground before we start running out of sufficiently populace-free areas to put it.  Both are time-limited means of energy production and neither is "clean."  Nuclear may be "clean" from a carbon perspective but definitely not from a radioactive waste perspective.

            There is also the matter of consequences when something does go wrong as it always inevitably will.  There are large swaths of Japan that will never again be inhabitable by humans.  There are people still dealing with the fallout from Chernobyl as there will be with Fukushima for decades to come.  There will be a surge of cancer and other fallout-related sickness and death in the surrounding areas.  I don't care how cheap and "baseload carbon free" it is, it is simply not worth the enormous risk to humanity.

            Lastly, to oppose nuclear does not mean "relying on natural gas other other fossil fuels," that's unfounded bullshit that you pulled out of your ass.  It's a nice talking point for the nuclear industry and their apologists though, despite the fact that it isn't true.

            Arrrr, the laws of science be a harsh mistress. -Bender B. Rodriguez

            by democracy inaction on Tue Jan 24, 2012 at 04:07:37 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  ditto x10000 pro-nukers spin. n/t (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              democracy inaction
            •  I support nuclear after having been (0+ / 0-)

              actively opposed to it for 30 years because it's the largest source of carbon free energy there is, right NOW in fact. This is not 'jargon' it's facts. Deal with it.

              This is all part of the discussion which is interesting and serious and necessary. Little of what you wrote above, democracy inaction, bears much to the truth. I am totally willing to discuss this with you. I don't think you are at all correct but I don't think you are bullsh*tting either.

              The biggest problem with anti-nuclear opinionators is the hubris with which they think they can't be contradicted and then get upset even reading an opposing

              opinion (like democracy inaction above).

              Dr. Isaac Asimov: "The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny ...'"

              by davidwalters on Wed Jan 25, 2012 at 07:37:42 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  asdf (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                shaharazade
                I support nuclear after having been actively opposed to it for 30 years because it's the largest source of carbon free energy there is, right NOW in fact. This is not 'jargon' it's facts. Deal with it.
                You're making a strawman argument here, I didn't say that nuclear wasn't "the largest source of carbon free energy there is," my problem is, at what cost?  Here is what I did say:
                Nuclear may be "clean" from a carbon perspective but definitely not from a radioactive waste perspective.
                Note that I am not disagreeing with you regarding nuclear from a carbon perspective.
                Little of what you wrote above, democracy inaction, bears much to the truth.
                Okay, like what?  Is nuclear waste not an issue?  Are there places a nuclear plant can be built that can be totally and completely insulated from natural disaster and if so, where?
                The biggest problem with anti-nuclear opinionators is the hubris with which they think they can't be contradicted and then get upset even reading an opposing opinion (like democracy inaction above).
                First of all, because I called you on your BS doesn't mean that I am "upset."  Second, some things - like the truth - can't be contradicted without abandoning intellectual honesty.

                Arrrr, the laws of science be a harsh mistress. -Bender B. Rodriguez

                by democracy inaction on Wed Jan 25, 2012 at 12:54:35 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

            •  Press release from January 16, 2012 (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              democracy inaction

              These little things called "facts" drive them crazy, lol. So much nonsense/propaganda, so little time...

              Joint press release with Germany's Federal Ministry for Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety

              Röttgen: Greenhouse gas reduction efforts a great success
              Emissions down by 25 percent over 1990 levels
              Germany continued to meet its Kyoto Protocol commitments during the 2010 economic recovery period. Based on the 1990 index year, Germany’s greenhouse gas emissions had sunk by nearly 25 percent in 2010. Some 295 million tonnes CO2 less were emitted in 2010 than in 1990. “Germany’s success in climate protection is exemplary on both international and European scale. We have demonstrated that economic growth and climate protection can go hand in hand. We hope to continue in this way and achieve a 40-percent reduction by 2020. We are almost two-thirds of the way there, and we see that our climate protection policy has provided strong incentive for economic growth, innovation and employment“, said Federal Minister for Environment Dr. Norbert Röttgen.
              http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/...

              Certainly, the CO2 emissions continue to be too high, but are still about 50% less per capita than the US figures. There's a lot of work yet to be done, but Germany is well on track to becoming the first wholly green-energy-based industrialized country by 2050. That gives the pro-nuclear contingent the vapors.

              „Wer kämpft, kann verlieren. Wer nicht kämpft, hat schon verloren.“ - Bertolt Brecht

              by translatorpro on Wed Jan 25, 2012 at 08:09:24 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Huh? (0+ / 0-)
                Certainly, the CO2 emissions continue to be too high, but are still about 50% less per capita than the US figures. There's a lot of work yet to be done, but Germany is well on track to becoming the first wholly green-energy-based industrialized country by 2050. That gives the pro-nuclear contingent the vapors.

                Why the hell would you think that?

                First of all, Germany's per capita emissions are not "50% less" than the US. The number is actually about 46%. But more importantly, what the does that have to with nuclear power?! The statistics I cite above are for 2009, the last year for which the IEA has published statistics on the web. At that time, Germany was more nuclear than the US, generating 23% of its electricity from nuclear, whereas the US managed less than 20%.

                Why didn't you compare Germany's per capita emissions to a real nuclear country, like its neighbor France, which generated three-quarters of its electricity from nuclear that year? That might have been a comparison that could have given "the pro-nuclear contingent the vapors" ... except that nuclear-heavy France's per capita emissions are 40% less than Germany's.

                Keep dreaming, bub. Frankly, I have no confidence in any plan that begins with "we hope."

                Crowing about "emissions down by 25 percent over 1990 levels" is more pathetic than impressive. For most of 1990, Germany was still two countries, one of which was run by a communist government that had an absolutely abysmal environmental record, with many old, inefficient plants burning coal. Those plants were shut down shortly after reunification, which makes up a substantial part of that 25% that the Federal Ministry for Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety is so proud of.

                I'll wait to be impressed when Germany's emissions are comparable to France's. France has a higher electricity consumption per capita, but its emissions per GDP are 36% lower than Germany's.

                Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
                -- Albert Einstein

                by bryfry on Wed Jan 25, 2012 at 12:03:43 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Of about 330,000 registered users on (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  shaharazade

                  Daily Kos, there are perhaps 5 (or less) who give a fig about what you think. As you know, I'm not among those elite few, and I'm sure you don't give a fig about me, either, which is a compliment in my book. I doubt you are even a Democrat, or even remotely interested in progressive politics, but only here to stir things up on the pro-nuke/anti-nuke threads.

                  I resolved to ignore you a while ago, but am making this one comment as an exception so you don't have to waste time in countering anything I say again, because I will disregard you (again) henceforth. But if you are into masochism, go ahead and waste your time here as much as you want. In case you hadn't noticed, you and your pals are becoming increasingly irrelevant and marginalized, and not in a small way because of your arrogance and rude behavior. You just are too full of yourself to notice.

                  Go ahead and keep tilting at the windmills and trying to tear them down. You can't win this one. Nuclear energy was yesterday, renewables are the future, and nothing you say will change that.

                  „Wer kämpft, kann verlieren. Wer nicht kämpft, hat schon verloren.“ - Bertolt Brecht

                  by translatorpro on Thu Jan 26, 2012 at 06:35:08 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Cute (0+ / 0-)

                    And you thought that I was writing that comment for you.

                    I think that it's funny that you should write, "That gives the pro-nuclear contingent the vapors," and not expect a response, or at least a correction of your misinformation and bogus comparisons. It is not surprising (and rather telling) that, instead of addressing any of the content of my comment, you immediately launched into a personal attack against me.

                    If I thought that you were going to be the only person to read the response, I doubt that I would bother. After all, as a self-proclaimed expert on everything German, your arrogance and close-mindedness are legendary. However, somebody else might be interested in a little more perspective, and although this is perhaps a long-dead diary, comments stick around, and I can refer to this information in the future without having to type out all of the details again.

                    If you want to take your toys and go home, that's your choice to make, but with an attitude like that, perhaps you shouldn't hang out in the playground too much.

                    In the future, however, please don't think that I'm writing anything for your sake, and please don't assume that I give a damn about what you think. Thanks.

                    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
                    -- Albert Einstein

                    by bryfry on Thu Jan 26, 2012 at 11:02:05 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site