Poll - Nuclear plant in your town

[Frank Lee]

I don't want any of that filth anywhere near me.

The other annoying component of all these cries for new power generation is that household electricity use has skyrocketed in the last few decades. Nobody is seriously promoting conservation; the whole emphasis is to let the consumption keep skyrocketing and simply build new generating and grid capacities for it all. That's where the money is for them but geez.

[Joenavy85]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

I don't want any of that filth anywhere near me.

The other annoying component of all these cries for new power generation is that household electricity use has skyrocketed in the last few decades. Nobody is seriously promoting conservation; the whole emphasis is to let the consumption keep skyrocketing and simply build new generating and grid capacities for it all. That's where the money is for them but geez.

i have no problem with nuclear power as long as it is properly regulated and maintained, but frank has made the best point so far. instead of figuring out how to provide more and more power, how about we (as a whole, not this site since obviously we're working on it) figure out how to limit usage per person. instead of limiting our carbon foot print we're just making it okay to have a larger one. Again when i say "we" or "us" i'm referring to the human race, not members of ecomodder

[Frank Lee]

What about the waste? Isn't it piling up? I hear about "reprocessing" but are we doing it? The poll says do you want a plant in your town... would you want a waste storage facility there too?

P.S. I KNOW how to "limit" usage!!! It's called progressive tiered pricing wherein the more you use, the higher the price/kwh goes... instead of the bass-ackwards system virtually the entire U.S. except for the West Coast has, where the more you use the more price breaks/kwh you get!

[Joenavy85]

hence the regulated aspect. when done properly there is little danger involved with waste storage. yeah, there should be tiered pricing, the more kwh you use the more each one costs makes sense, unstead of the apparent "valued customer approach" (as my uncle calls it)

[Christ]

Im game for pricing system like cellular service providers use, wherein the user pays a set rate for what they presume they will use, based on calculations for their family size, other considerations.. overages cause the price at the bill cycle to sky rocket!

Give them 3-6 months for new homes to determine Requirements, where there are no overcharges.

Alternatively, select and purchase a plan ridiculously higher than you think you need, and get a credit if you only make it to the next lower tier, etc.

For instance, you purchase a plan for 1000kw/h per month, and only use 650, well within the limit of the 800 plan just below yours. For this month, we put you on the 800 plan, instead of the 1000 plan, and credit the difference to your acct.

After 3 monthsof this happening, you are either forced to switch plans (so you don't use the program to avoid overages), or you lose the rebate program and stay at the higher package price, regardless of use.

[Christ]

NYSEG actually charges more for the use of "green energy"... Something like another 0.008 cents per. Kinda ridiculous to charge more for cheaper energy....

[Frank Lee]

Originally Posted by Joenavy85

hence the regulated aspect. when done properly there is little danger involved with waste storage.

I don't trust "regulations" and that things will be "done properly" for the next 500,000 years as much as many of you.

[cfg83]

Frank -

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

I don't trust "regulations" and that things will be "done properly" for the next 500,000 years as much as many of you.

Yeah, I don't even look that far in advance. The operative assumption is that there will be a stable and responsible government/civilization in place for 1000 years. Even if your science is good, I don't think that a 1000+ year assumption is valid.

CarloSW2

[Nevyn]

I live near one. It's one of the ONLY decent employers in my area. I support it.

And yes, they store their fuel on-site. No, it does NOT bother me. I'd rather live close enough to be obliterated than I would far enough away to worry about fallout sickness.

[user removed]

Lets see, two reactors for electric power generation (Surry). Then you have the Navy storage depot, then the Newport news Shipyard which built most of the nuclear ships in the Navy. Then the Norfolk Navy yard at Little Creek, where a large number of those ships are parked when they are in port.

Do I mind if a reactor is close to me. I would dare say there are more vessels containing fissionable material within 50 miles of me than most if not all of the members of this forum.

Jump over some of the fences around here and you could be shot, legally.

regards
Mech