McCain in the debate: We need more nuclear power plants

Although he mentioned other alternative fuel sources, this was the one he emphasized as a known method for generating energy. Is this a sign the McCain would not push development of alternatives?

Along with his voting record (I think it was like 14/16 times he voted against funding alternative energy - I may have the exact #s slightly off) and his general budget freeze, the statement above indicates that he would not be heavily investing in alternative energy source development.

I woke up this morning to a local public radio piece on how the Hanford Nuclear Reservation cannot find qualified employees to deal with the Hanford clean-up. Hanford was one of the first (1940s & 1950s) nuclear plants in the country and much of the waste was inappropriately stored, and now threatens to migrate via ground water into the mighty Columbia River and thus into the Pacific Ocean. The federal government has dragged its feet on this environmental clean-up for decades and the state govrernment has had to sue to get the appropriate budget appropriations. Now, the country (!) is short of educated engineers and skilled construction workers as the baby boomers retire.

Now that is an interesting back-drop to McCain's plans to build multiple nuclear facilities. Just how is the government going to accomplish this? (if he wins) I will not be voting for him but then I am a yellow dog Democrat. (-;

I used to work for a company that provided the bulk of the engineers that work in and operate US nuclear facilities and one of our greatest challenges was finding qualified people. The average age is over 50 and most of them are retiring or thinking about it. Because the US has not invested in any new plants in decades people aren't going to school to learn to build, run and maintain them. Overseas labor (H1 Visa people) is becoming the norm because that's where the nuclear programs are still current. I think that if we did invest in new plants, part of that investment would have to be funding degree programs for people to become the experts we need. Nuclear is only a piece of the energy puzzle.

Nuclear power is most of the energy solution in France, and it is important in many other countries.

If we don't solve the high level nuclear waste storage problem, we are going to have difficulties continuing with the use of our present (and aging) nuclear power plants. Opposition to Yucca Mountain is intense. A lot has been spent on it, but no decision ever seems to be reached.

What do the French do with their waste?

Estimated construction costs of a 1,100 MW Nuclear plant falls in the range of $6 to $9 billion dollars. It is expensive. I think McCain at one time anyway was calling for the construction of 45 of them. I could imagine a lot of legal costs as well as the vast majority of communities would challenge construction.

http://www.synapse-energy.com/Downloads/SynapsePaper.2008-07.0.Nuclear-Plant-Con...

>6 geneg: Geneg, the French solution to nuclear waste has two parts. First, they have a lot less of it because they reprocess their nuclear fuel for reuse. The reprocessing extracts plutonium. We can hope that it will never be redirected to other purposes. Second, the French do a form of glassification of the remaining waste, and then they store it underground. Some experts are not sure this is a long term solution.

I think nuclear is a bad idea primarily because, with enough technical progress in solar and wind technologies, they will produce the power cheaper -- especially if you include long term cleanup costs. Most of the rest of Europe is on this path. The Libyans have calculated that their solar resources could power all of Europe, and high capacity transmission cables are now being laid across the Mediterranean.

McCain had many opportunities to preserve tax incentives for renewable energy. But he missed all the votes, and so the bill to continue these credits could never get past the Republican Senate filibuster. On one occasion, they were 1 vote short, and McCain was in Washington, but he still didn't show up. He doesn't believe in solar and wind -- he thinks they are silly tree hugger technologies that won't ever produce much. I think the tax incentives for renewables were preserved, in the end, as an attachment to the bailout bill, along with a subsidy for American companies that produce wooden arrows. I am sure glad we are keeping our wooden arrow manufacturing base.

Back when nuclear power plants were being built, the price tags were considerably inflated by the delays caused by litigation by anti-nuclear organizations. Unless the federal government intervenes, the same thing will happen now.

Those forces are also against reprocessing, which means that we have spent fuel rods being stored at our existing nuclear power plants, rather than being reprocessed, as the French do, for use in new fuel rods.

The federal government is over-riding local concerns about high voltage transmission line construction. Our electric power grid is at risk by lack of capacity, but it has been difficult to construct more power lines.

A lot less problems and undoubtedly less expensive to look for other solutions than nuclear energy. A lot of people wouldn't mind a nuclear plant in someone else's back yard but don't want one anywhere near their own. It's really almost a non-starter and there are other better solutions. When you think about our energy problems--here we are with a chance to innovate in so many different directions. Put up these plants all over the place and that will all be dead. There is nothing imaginative about this solution. It would not challenge the nation. It would put everybody under the control of the few people running the plants and the politicians behind them.

Once again, we have that Hero of America, Ronald Reagan to thank for being so far behind the eight ball on this.

Speaking of hobbyhorses...

Or was it dead horses?

The undead horse approached geneg, tottering on its decaying legs...

~the product of nuclear pollution~

Tomacco!

TOMACCO!!

TOMACCO!!!

One major problem with McCain's nuclear power plants is that the first one is, at a minimum, 20 years away from going online (see The Weather Makers). That is just too long to wait to reduce CO2 emissions. They need to be reduced now, immediately. The next 10 years are critical (again, see The Weather Makers). The longer we wait, the worse global warming will become. So, nuclear might be part of the answer, but alternative energy sources still need to move now. And, an important aside, the development of alternative energy will be an economic plus, it will actually help the economy. It's a win-win if the US can get this stuff going.