"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 15:30:55 GMT, Fred Dehl
wrote:

"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:

"Fred Dehl" wrote in message
...


There hasn't been a new nuclear plant in the US in over 30 years.

Why not?

Envirofreaks.

Wrong. No applications since 1973.... until 2003 and now three plants
are being considered under "Early Site Permits."

Personally, I'm really unimpressed. I pay two different electric
bills. Coal generated power is $06.7337/kWh and nuclear generated
power is $09.054/kWh. I'm not enthused enough with technology to pay
an extra 35%, well, just because. As an added bonus, I can worry
about terrorism (airport is less than two miles from the reactor) or
accidental nuclear disaster.

As an added incentive, in case of disaster and in order to enhance my
sense of security, I (and everybody else) have to drive *towards* the
nuclear plant (within a couple of miles) to exit the island from a
single bridge.

Not only am I a pragmatist, I can remember Three Mile Island.... and
all of their assurances that nothing serious was wrong, even as
radioactive steam was escaping and the core reached 5000 degrees...

In fact, as I rethink this.... it is likely that power companies have
not, for 30 years, wanted to face the possibility of another 1 billion
plus dollar cleanup. Now, with a new and younger generation that
didn't face the economic reality of that most uniquely human trait...
mistakes, perhaps they will try the same thing and expect a different
result. I think Einstein called that insanity!

I was just reading that as a result of the Chernobyl accident, there is
still soil in Great Britain that's too far gone for livestock to graze on.
So much for NOYB and his "nuke 'em all" erectile dysfunction remedy.