Stop the Nuclear Industry Welfare
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/apr/13/nuclear-i...
"Nuclear welfare started with research and development. According to the non-partisan Congressional Research Service, since 1948 the federal government has spent more than $95bn (in 2011 dollars) on nuclear energy research and development (R&D). That is more than four times the amount spent on solar, wind, geothermal, biomass, biofuels, and hydropower combined. But federal R&D was not enough; the industry also wanted federal liability insurance too, which it got back in 1957 with the Price-Anderson Act. This federal liability insurance programme for nuclear plants was meant to be temporary, but Congress repeatedly extended it, most recently through 2025. Price-Anderson puts taxpayers on the hook for losses that exceed $12. 6bn if there is a nuclear plant disaster. When government estimates show the cost for such a disaster could reach $720bn in property damage alone, that's one sweetheart deal for the nuclear industry!
R&D and Price-Anderson insurance are still just the tip of the iceberg. From tax breaks for uranium mining and loan guarantees for uranium enrichment to special depreciation benefits and lucrative federal tax breaks for every kilowatt hour from new plants, nuclear is heavily subsidised at every phase. The industry also bilks taxpayers when plants close down with tax breaks for decommissioning plants. Further, it is estimated that the cost to taxpayers for the disposal of radioactive nuclear waste could be as much as $100bn."
http://money.cnn.com/2011/03/25/news/economy/nuclear_accident_costs/inde...
Nuclear industry shielded from big disaster costs
Dead Stinking Bodies
A commercial nuclear power meltdown may render a wide region uninhabitable for centuries. This has occurred in Chernobyl and Fukushima. It very nearly occurred at Three Mile Island, Pennsylvania.
Economic Damages for the two above (actual) incidents are on the order of $750B EACH. For those unfamiliar with Big'O" notation, that means the RANGE of losses is between $75B and $7.5T.
A nuclear incident involving a spent fuel pool, which nearly occured at the Fukushima Daiichi Unit 4, may comprise an extinction event for about 1/3 of Planet Earth.
Economic Damages for such an incident is on the order of $5T. That means the RANGE of losses would be between $500B and $50T.
$400M Commercial Insurance PLUS $11B from the Price-Anderson Fund is not enough to 'get the water wet'.
Thus the USA federal government nuclear power subsidy for commercial reactors, by my lights, is on the order of $5T.
Never mind all the DEAD, STINKING BODIES
Bill Duff
Price-Anderson
Price-Anderson was NEVER meant to be temporary. Additionally, it's NOT taxpayer money that is used if the Price-Anderson Fund is used; it's money from a special tax on the nuclear industry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price%E2%80%93Anderson_Nuclear_Industries_I...
Power reactor licensees are required by the act to obtain the maximum amount of insurance against nuclear related incidents which is available in the insurance market (as of 2011, $375 million per plant). Any monetary claims that fall within this maximum amount are paid by the insurer(s). The Price-Anderson fund, which is financed by the reactor companies themselves, is then used to make up the difference....
It does!
Read the posts below. When the anti-nukes tell you how much money is being spent on subsidies for nuclear power; they are counting as part of that "subsidy", the amount of money the US spends developing and maintaining nuclear weapons, and developing and maintaining nuclear propulsion for the US Navy.
As one poster put it most aptly below; it's like calling for a stop to the subsidies that the Government gives the airlines. However, those "subsidies" consist of the money the US spent to develop and build B-2 "Spirit" bombers. Those B-2s are not subsidies to the airlines. But the "anti-airline" group calls them subsidies so that they can bamboozle the public into thinking that airlines get subsidies when they don't.
Nuclear Loan Guarantee - good investment or corporate handout?
http://kucinich.house.gov/news/email/show.aspx?ID=YINCJCGQFWAEHUP55XK3I6...
Another Senator Takes a Stand
First US Senator Bernie Sanders, of Vermont, speaks out against nuclear industry's heavy public subsidies in last Friday's article in The Guardian, posted by OP in the original post, above.
Today, US Senator Ron Wyden, of Oregon, wrote a letter to the Japanese Ambassador Fujisaki expressing his grave concerns about the stability/safety of FDNPP following his plant tour last week. He urges Japan to accept international assistance to stabilize the plant, particularly the SFP #4, and has written additional letters to Secretary of State Clinton, Department of Energy Secretary Chu and NRC Chairman Jaczko asking them to account for what steps their respective agencies are currently taking to help resolve this ongoing crisis, and urging them to mobilize their respective and collective resources and expertise, along with the international community, to help Japan tame this beast.
The press release is linked below. It contains links to all 4 letters:
http://wyden.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/?id=2f18cd7b-8207-4315-8c...
Senator Wyden, whose home state of Oregon has the highest documented Fukushima Cs137 fall-out in the Lower 48 (thus far),
http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/forum/218/kaltofens-soil-measurement-100x-uc...
and Senator Wyden includes this statement in his letter to the Ambassador, "Loss of containment in any of these pools, especially the pool at Unit 4 which has the highest inventory of the hottest fuel, could result in an even greater release of radiation than the initial accident."
MM
This should stand alone. Am
This should stand alone. Am reposting as a new thread.
Disinformation above
The above contains the usual rant that Federal Government spent way more R&D money on nuclear power than it did on renewables. However, what the anti-nukes are not telling you when they make this disingenuous comparison, is that they are counting the money that the Federal Government spent on nuclear weapons R&D.
It's like saying that all the BILLIONS of dollars that the Federal Government spent developing the B-2 Spirit "Stealth" bomber is really a subsidy or welfare for the airlines.
The Federal Government spent lots of money on nuclear weapons research. They also spent money developing reactors for submarines for the US Navy. The national labs also researched various reactor types like the Molten Salt Reactor Experiment at Oak Ridge, and the Integral Fast Reactor at Argonne.
However, both commercial reactors used in commercial power plants; the PWR and the BWR were NOT developed in Government labs. They were developed by the private companies that are the reactor vendors.
For example, the General Electric Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) was developed at a sight in the East Bay, near Sunol; the Vallecitos Nuclear Energy Center:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vallecitos_Nuclear_Center
The Vallecitos boiling water reactor (VBWR) was the first privately owned and operated nuclear power plant to deliver significant quantities of electricity to a public utility grid...The plant was originally a collaborative effort of General Electric and Pacific Gas and Electric Company, with Bechtel Corporation serving as engineering contractor.
Good neighbor Vallecitos
http://lpc1.clpccd.cc.ca.us/lpc/express/Newshome/11-14/radiation.htm
"South Pleasanton, parts of
"South Pleasanton, parts of Sunol, and southwest Livermore are also affected. In 1977, General Electric supposedly shut down its main reactor at Vallecitos Nuclear Center. The facility was closed due to its location near the active Verona Fault. As time passed, residential developments sprang up around the "retired" nuclear center.
However in 1998, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) approved the shipment of ten nuclear fuel rods to the "closed" Vallecitos site. Later, it was discovered that 50 shipments were made since 1977, 11 of which came in the last five years. The public was not notified of any of these shipments. The last shipment came in November 1999. CARE has many concerns over the Vallecitos activities. With the fault below the site, security is a major issue. Furthermore, a fence and alarm system are the only protections for the 54 nuclear fuel rods on site."
http://www.ewrd.com/ewrd/index.asp
Security concerns
The public was not notified of any of these shipments. The last shipment came in November 1999.
===================
When nuclear material or nuclear weapons... are shipped, the public is usually NOT notified out of security concerns. If you tell the public that you are moving a sensitive object, then you are also telling the bad guys, terrorists... that would seek to attack the shipment when it is at its most vulnerable time - out on the road.
For example, the Dept. of Energy has a special fleet of 18 wheeler trucks for transporting nuclear cargo. They don't have a big DOE logo on the side or say "Nuclear Weapons Transport Truck". They are "plain paper wrappers" - non-descript with nothing to call special attention to them.
Isn't that the way we want this cargo shipped; discreetly, without undue attention, or telling the bad guys what you are doing? Of course, that frustrates the hell out of the anti-nukes. They don't care about the security. They want to be notified, just like the bad guys, so they can raise a ruckus.
POOR READING COMPREHENSION, as per usual
Another anti-nuke with dismally poor reading comprehension!!!
The article is NOT about Vallecitos.
The article is about the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.
It has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the nuclear power industry.
Lawrence Livermore is a US Government Laboratory that designs the USA's NUCLEAR WEAPONS
Didn't I just tell you that the idiot anti-nukes can't tell the difference between nuclear power and nuclear weapons???
LIES and MISINFORMATION
The above is the typical lies, misinformation and propaganda that we get from the idiot, lying anti-nukes.
The LIE about the Price Anderson Act being a giveaway or subsidy to the nuclear industry is wrong, because the money the Government would use for the 2nd tier of insurance comes from the nuclear industry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price%E2%80%93Anderson_Nuclear_Industries_I...
The Price-Anderson fund, which is financed by the reactor companies themselves, is then used to make up the difference. Each reactor company is obliged to contribute up to $111.9 million per reactor in the event of an accident with claims that exceed the $375 million insurance limit.
As stated, Congress can increase the nuclear industry input should the amount needed exceed the $375 million per reactor.
In terms of nuclear waste storage, the federal government imposes a TAX on the nuclear utilities to pay for this. It's called the "Nuclear Waste Fund" and it has many billions of dollars in it above what was spent on Yucca Mountain. In fact, the reactor companies are wondering if they still have to pay this tax now that the Obama Administration cancelled Yucca Mountain:
http://www.lvrj.com/news/doe-sued-over-nuclear-waste-fund-89826842.html
The Department of Energy was sued Friday by state utility regulators who challenge whether consumers should continue paying into a $30 billion government nuclear waste fund if a Yucca Mountain repository is no longer in the plans.
This forum is followed by people who know the technology and the laws of nuclear power. Why do the stupid anti-nukes keep coming in trumpeting their abject stupidity and ignorance by telling all these LIES that are so trivially disproved.
You would think these moron would get a clue; but no, no, no - they just keep recycling the same old LIES.