20 Questions for nuclear power advocates

This'll be kind of a slow-motion game, since we're still pretty well preoccupied here at the Dependable Ranch.

Let's start.

1) Imagine President Obama sings an executive order tomorrow to close all coal, fuel, and natural gas fired electrical generating facilities by 31 December 2019. In order to replace that capacity, how many new nuclear plants need to be built? To simplify the solution, you may assume that demand remains constant over time, and that each new plant generates 1 gigawatt of electricity.

2) Given the need for large quantities of available cooling water, locate on a map of the US the most optimal placements for the number of plants you derived as an answer to question 1. To simplify the solution, you may assume that population centers are non-existent, and that geographical features are your sole consideration.

3) Once you have identified the best geographical locations in question 2, indicate which of these sites are publicly owned, and which are privately owned. Calculate the approximate cost of acquiring this land. You may assume that land which is already owned by power companies is free.

4) How many companies currently do business in the US with the expertise needed to construct a new nuclear powered facility?

5) Which of those companies is capable of constructing multiple facilities simultaneously?

6) Subtract the number of currently operating nuclear plants from the number you came up with in question one.

7) In order to meet the goal of building the number of new plants you arrived it in answer to question 6, how many plants need to be built simultaneously to complete construction by 331 December 2019? To simplify the exercise, you may assume that each plant can be constructed, from ground breaking to generating electricity, in 4 years.

8) Since the first US nuclear plants were built back in the 1950s, how many took 4 years or less to construct?

We'll play more later this week.

Continue reading 20 Questions for nuclear power advocates

Conditioning

Driving home last night i noticed the BP stations on Guess Rd. had dropped the price of gasoline to $3.39, and i thought, wow, that's getting pretty cheap.

Then i thought about it some more and realized, not so much.

Then, i reconsidered.

Continue reading Conditioning

Gas?

No gas at Costco this morning. Driving back from Richmond yesterday afternoon, the station i topped at on the NC/VA line was out of 89 and 93 grade gas.

Supposedly, supply interruptions caused by Hurricane Ike are to blame, but at least some reports have the shortages beginning in late August.

Meanwhile, 2/3 of North Carolinian adults think that opening our coastline to more drilling for oil will help.

Go figure.

Continue reading Gas?

Because it worked so well in California

Just ask Governor Gray Davis.

News & Observer:

Duke Energy is pushing to sell electricity outside its monopoly service area in the Carolinas, a move that would introduce competition and shake up the state's regulated utility model.

. . .

Duke officials are promoting wholesale competition as beneficial.

"Orangeburg will be able to offer customers much more competitively priced power than they have now, so those customers benefit," Sheehan said. "It also sends a strong economic development message to businesses trying to remain competitive or seeking to locate in the region."

Further proof that bad ideas never die; they just hide out until people forget how bad they are (reg. required):

Duke Energy, a power-generating company accused of overcharging customers millions of dollars during California's year-old energy crisis, has secretly offered Gov. Gray Davis a deal that it hopes will solve its legal problems while helping to calm the state's chaotic electricity markets.

The proposed settlement, outlined in documents prepared in March by Duke's lawyers, calls for an end to various state investigations, private lawsuits and state complaints to federal authorities accusing Duke of overcharging.

In return, Duke would make an unspecified "appropriate payment" but admit no wrongdoing.

"Duke is committed to sharing pain" and "expediting high-level confidential discussions that would embrace the governor's political and public relations needs," according to the documents, which were given to The New York Times by someone who wanted the issue aired publicly.

Pass this revision to the Public Utilities codes, and the question is how long till the next NY Times expose on Duke Energy, centering on its operations in the Carolinas? Three years? Five? Ten?

Continue reading Because it worked so well in California

Dole: Offshore drilling OK if . . .

Six months ago, i would not have expected energy policy to be a hot electoral topic. So what do i know?

Sen. Elizabeth Dole said North Carolina should have the option of allowing oil exploration off the state's coast, backing away from her long-held support of a federal moratorium on Atlantic drilling.

In a statement Wednesday to The Associated Press, Dole said she supports lifting a 27-year-old moratorium that has prohibited exploration off the North Carolina coast.

"Now, more than ever, responsible and practical steps are needed to increase our energy independence and strengthen economic and national security," Dole said.

The Republican, facing re-election for the first time, said the option should be available to states so long as the exploration is safe, clean and not visible from land.

Well, i guess that last part ought to put the kibosh on any offshore drilling for a while. And if "not visible from land" doesn't qualify as NIMBY, i'm not sure what does.

Continue reading Dole: Offshore drilling OK if . . .

"Let's do it all."

Recent discussions here about John McCain's proposals to build 45 new nuclear powered electrical plants centered on the contentions that those plants will eliminate the need for carbon emitting coal plants. Here's McCain supporter Trent Lott, former US Senator and current lobbyist for both Shell and Chevron, among other companies:

"It's time we quit fighting in America about having an energy policy. We have got to have an energy policy, and let's do it all. Let's do drill. Let's do nuclear power. Let's do clean coal. Let's do alternative fuels. Let's do solar, wind. Let's do conservation. Quit arguing over whether we produce more or conserve more. Let's do it all. That's the solution."

Of course, that's not a policy proposal so much as the ravings of a moron who should be kept far from the halls of power. But it is the essence of McCain's plan; not a choice between nuclear power or coal, but a choice between breaking the bank on coal and nuclear power, or coming up with a new way of thinking about our energy use.

Continue reading "Let's do it all."

McCain runs into opposition over offshore oil plan

I'm just gonna post these excerpts without comment for now. I'm just both glad and fascinated that energy policy is coming to the fore so early in the election cycle. I would not have expected that.

McCain appeared with California's popular Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger at the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History to promote his ideas on how to wean the United States from foreign oil and reduce greenhouse gas emissions blamed for global warming.

Outside the museum, a group of protesters took issue with McCain over backing offshore oil drilling, chanting "Get oil out" and holding up such signs as, "Not off our coast" and "We can't drill our way out of the energy crisis."

Inside, during a round-table discussion, McCain heard complaints from a panelist, Michael Feeney, executive director of the Land Trust for Santa Barbara County. Feeney did not specifically mention McCain, who will face Democrat Barack Obama in the November presidential election.

Santa Barbara was the site of a major oil spill in 1969.

"It makes me nervous to think about those who are proposing to drain America's offshore oil and gas reserves as quickly as possible in hopes of driving down the price of gasoline," Feeney said.

Feeney also said he opposed McCain's plan to jump-start the building of new nuclear reactor plants for meeting America's rising energy demands.

Obama, too, criticized McCain's proposal to encourage the building of 45 new nuclear reactors by 2030. He said it lacked a plan for waste storage and was among several energy-strategy ideas that Obama said were "not serious energy policies."

Obama spoke in Nevada, a state where proposals to build a nuclear waste disposal site at Yucca Mountain have generated strong opposition. He also took aim at McCain's plan to allow more offshore U.S. oil drilling.

"It doesn't make sense for America," the Illinois senator said. "In fact, it makes about as much sense as his proposal to build 45 new nuclear reactors without a plan to store the waste some place other than right here at Yucca Mountain."

UPDATE:
Heh heh:

During a roundtable discussion on energy security at Santa Barbara's Natural History Museum, one of the panelists invited by the McCain campaign to sit onstage beside the candidate -- disagreed with the Arizona senator's energy plans and lambasted his nuclear energy proposal.

"I'm a little bit bemused that I ended up on this panel," said Michael Feeney, chair of the Santa Barbara Land Trust, a non-profit conservation group.

He excoriated a proposal McCain outlined last Wednesday to build 45 new nuclear plants in the United States by 2030 and another 55 in later years.

"I don’t understand how it’s not compromising our environmental standards to propose a crash program to build more nuclear power plants when the industry has not complied with the federal law that requires there to be safe disposal for the radioactive waste," Feeney said.

McCain responded by citing the example of nuclear technology in Europe and Navy ships powered by nuclear energy.

"My friend, the technology is there. The Europeans do it. I mean it's safe. It's being done. So, to think that that is going to require some pain on the American people economically when the Europeans-- 80 percent of the French electricity is generated by nuclear power. They are doing fine," McCain said to applause from the audience.

Continue reading McCain runs into opposition over offshore oil plan

It beats going to Mars

McCain calls for $300 million prize for car battery

Republican John McCain said on Monday if elected president he would challenge American experts to develop a futuristic battery to power cars and win a $300 million prize.

. . .

"Whether it takes a meeting with automakers during my first month in office, or my signature on an act of Congress, we will meet the goal of a swift conversion of American vehicles away from oil," McCain told a town hall meeting in Fresno, in rural central California.

. . .

McCain said he would issue a Clean Car Challenge to U.S. automakers.

"For every automaker who can sell a zero-emissions car, we will commit a $5,000 dollar tax credit for each and every customer who buys that car. For other vehicles, whatever type they may be, the lower the carbon emissions, the higher the tax credit," he said.

And he offered a big reward for whoever comes up with a technological breakthrough: "A $300 million prize for the development of a battery package that has the size, capacity, cost and power to leapfrog the commercially available plug-in hybrids or electric cars."

I have absolutely no confidence that McCain can bring this proposal to reality, any more so than did George Bush with his Mars trip, yet this is still an important dialog to have. Let's see where Obama goes next.

And $300 million is actually, you know, real money.

Continue reading It beats going to Mars

Not in my back yard

This Ass Press article, which looks to have been reprinted in just about every newspaper in the country, talks about a letter drafted by Sen. Lamar Alexander's* (R-TN) office to the EPA. Seems the EPA wants to change rules governing how air pollution is measured in and around our national parks. Peak pollutant days would no longer be as signficant as the annual average of pollutants measured. As a result, more coal fired plants would be allowed to be built in the vicinity of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Alexander, along with Liddy Dole (R-NC) and a handful of other Senators have written a stern letter to the EPA. (Of the 4 Republicans signing the letter, 3 2 - Alexander, Dole, and John Warner (R-VA) are up for re-election in November; curiously, none of the signers currently has a text of the letter up on their websites.)

Here's my favorite part:

Alexander isn't against coal, which fuels about half the electric power generation in this country. But he worries a half dozen new coal plants are planned in Kentucky, Virginia and North Carolina, all within 200 miles of the Smokies. Thirty already operate in the region.

Here's my second favorite:

To lower $4-per-gallon-and-climbing gas prices, we have to honor the law of supply and demand. That means we have to find more, as well as use less.

. . .

States should be able to explore for more oil offshore, just as four states already do along the Gulf Coast. That would give money to the states for education, conservation, and to take care of their beaches.

One assumes that little of that drilling will be taking place off the coast of Tennessee.

==============
* To be honest, i had no idea that Lamar Alexander was still drawing breath, let alone serving in the US Senate. I wonder if Tennesseans had the same reaction.

UPDATE: Sen. Warner is retiring after his current term expires in January.

Continue reading Not in my back yard