Stop subsidizing nuclear!

Messages about other areas of TRIUS expertise (Energy, Radiation Safety, Risk,..) and Technology, in general...
Post Reply
User avatar
HowardE
Frequent User
Frequent User
Posts: 95
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2012 6:07 pm

Stop subsidizing nuclear!

Post by HowardE » Sat Aug 24, 2013 12:20 am

I ve voiced my opinion before. Seeing the reckless behavior of TAPCO at Fukushima reminded me that we (government) should stop subsidizing nuclear power to make it look economically attractive. Let it survive on is own and if it can't let it fade away. No more subsidizing technologies and industries that are killing us.
Anger is a good motivator!

User avatar
KimChin
Active User
Active User
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 8:55 pm

Re: Stop subsidizing nuclear!

Post by KimChin » Sat Aug 24, 2013 1:07 am

Subsidizing nuclear is such a myth...

People think that "The bulk of government energy subsidies have gone to nuclear energy." Fact: An exhaustive study of federal energy incentives spanning the past 60 years has been released by Management Information Services Inc., a D.C.-based economic research firm. It shows that the main beneficiaries of more than $800 billion of federal energy incentives over the past six decades have been the oil and natural gas industries, and that nuclear energy and renewable technologies both have received 9 percent of the total inccentives provided by the federal government since 1950. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 authorized $18.5 billion in loan guarantees each for nuclear and renewable energy projects. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 authorized an additional $60 billion in loan guarantee authority and tax credits for renewable and alternative energy supplies with none for nuclear energy.

User avatar
dhimmer
Casual User
Casual User
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2011 6:48 am

Re: Stop subsidizing nuclear!

Post by dhimmer » Sat Aug 24, 2013 1:37 pm

HowardE wrote:I ve voiced my opinion before. Seeing the reckless behavior of TAPCO at Fukushima reminded me that we (government) should stop subsidizing nuclear power to make it look economically attractive. Let it survive on is own and if it can't let it fade away. No more subsidizing technologies and industries that are killing us.
Howard, where are you getting your data from? How many people has the nuclear industry killed in the USA, let's say in the last 10 years and how many have other types of electricity generating industries have killed (all components of the industries, from the very first step to the delivery of electricity)?

I'd like to see the numbers that support your conclusions! I think that if what you say was true, at least in the USA, people would support Nuclear Power, like they do.

User avatar
HowardE
Frequent User
Frequent User
Posts: 95
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2012 6:07 pm

Re: Stop subsidizing nuclear!

Post by HowardE » Sat Aug 24, 2013 3:21 pm

dhimmer wrote:I'd like to see the numbers that support your conclusions! I think that if what you say was true, at least in the USA, people would support Nuclear Power, like they do.
Are you serious? USA public supports Nuclear? Whatever it is you are smoking, you should cut down ;-)

USA public is against nuclear probably more that the public in any other country!
Anger is a good motivator!

User avatar
dhimmer
Casual User
Casual User
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2011 6:48 am

Re: Stop subsidizing nuclear!

Post by dhimmer » Sat Aug 24, 2013 4:10 pm

Howard, you may want to attribute to smoking something, but I am not making this up! Here is a gallup poll taken in 2012 *AFTER* the Fukushima accident. Americans support Nuclear Power!

http://www.gallup.com/poll/153452/Ameri ... shima.aspx

There are other sources, with similar results, if you don't like the gallup poll.

However, you forgot to answer my other, more important question, so I'll ask it again.
dhimmer wrote:Howard, where are you getting your data from? How many people has the nuclear industry killed in the USA, let's say in the last 10 years and how many have other types of electricity generating industries have killed (all components of the industries, from the very first step to the delivery of electricity)?
Can you please answer? You may have a point there, and I'd like to see the information/data you base it on.

User avatar
HowardE
Frequent User
Frequent User
Posts: 95
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2012 6:07 pm

Re: Stop subsidizing nuclear!

Post by HowardE » Sat Aug 24, 2013 11:21 pm

I am not so sure I buy the gallop results. But, if you want to believe them, go right ahead.

Answer what? There have been dozens of studies that estimate tens of thousands of deaths because of Fukushima and hundreds of thousands because of Chernobyl. Just search on-line. If I could find them, so can you. I don't think any other power source can cause that magnitude of damage.
Anger is a good motivator!

User avatar
GradPhys
Frequent User
Frequent User
Posts: 56
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 3:07 pm

Re: Stop subsidizing nuclear!

Post by GradPhys » Mon Aug 26, 2013 11:36 am

Dhimmer, here are the numbers you are looking for, since HowardE didn't have them handy ;-) They are widely available, just do a google search... Hope they help in understanding the relative risks.

Code: Select all

Energy Source                      Death Rate (deaths per TWh) OLD
--------------------              ---------------------------------------------
Coal - world average               161 (26% of world energy, 50% of electricity)
Coal - China                       278
Coal - USA                          15
Oil                                 36  (36% of world energy)
Natural Gas                          4  (21% of world energy)
Biofuel/Biomass                     12
Peat                                12
Solar (rooftop)                     0.44 (less than 0.1% of world energy)
Wind                                0.15 (less than 1% of world energy)
Hydro                               0.10 (europe death rate, 2.2% of world energy)
Hydro - world including Banqiao)    1.4 (about 2500 TWh/yr and 171,000 Banqiao dead)
Nuclear                             0.04 (5.9% of world energy)

Post Reply