The C-Span 2 presentation by
the author of "The Deniers",
Lawrence Solomon, is still
available for viewing on line.
Posted on 05/20/2008 3:23:58 PM PDT by Delacon
ping
The US would only need 40% capacity, and would have to use the new ‘clean nuke’ technology.
This sounds odd to me...i was on nuclear subs...i’m pretty sure you can adjust the output of a reactor by the rods.
His points are actually somewhat dimwitted.
Simply build enough nuclear power plants to meet daytime requirements.
When the nighttime load is less... bleed off the electricity or divert the steam away from the turbines. It’s not as efficient as only generating electricity when the electricity is needed, but it’s not the impossibility the author claims.
It looks like France just used the wrong mix of nuke power. I think it would be a good idea to use nuclear power if planned correctly. France, like most liberals, made a decision based off passion instead of good logical, sound planning.
On the plus side maybe it's a good argument for electric cars. A few million batteries can soak up a lot of juice while recharging overnight.
My goodness. This article makes us look like a bunch of back woods hacks. Of course we can solve the power demand problem like many communities do now with alternate energy sources and high peak production. We are the Unites States by God, not France!!
The liberals wants clean energy, but then they discredit most kinds of clean energy. The liberals hate nuclear energy and they want to make McCain’s plan look bad because they don’t want nuclear power, even though it is one of the few viable alternatives to fossil based sources of energy.
I’m not convinced.
First, so what if you have to waste a little bit of power or occassionally shut down a reactor. It’s still better than funding Islamic terrorists.
Second, our country is so large, and we could be talking about so many reactors, that occasional shutdowns should be manageable. If you got 4 reactors and you have to shut one down, it’s a problem. If you’ve got 50 and you have to shut one down, not so much.
Third, I’m sure if we put our minds to it, we could find a way to use that excess power productively.
Fourth, I don’t buy that France having to import power during peak times is financially ruinous to them. It’s not like a free market doesn’t exist. Notice that France isn’t rushing to reopen old power plants, they are merely considering it.
This article just doesn’t pass the smell test.
“This sounds odd to me...i was on nuclear subs...i’m pretty sure you can adjust the output of a reactor by the rods.”
Well you were on ssns but I don’t think the rods are used to regulate power output to a sub. Anyone want to chime in?
That is not a negative result. It is a positive one.
Congressman Billybob
The real wet blanket is the reality that hits when people realize that we can’t build a single oil refinery let alone hundreds of nuke plants.
So there is no benefit to manufactures getting cut rate electrical power?
I find that hard to believe.
It is interesting though that those who would have us not invest in nuclear power are not using the usual enviromental
canards, perhaps because people don’t buy them any more.
It would probably not be out of line to suggest that nuclear power could play a larger role in the U.S. than it is at present.
IMO, there is an awful lot of misdirection in this article. Number one, we don’t have to sell the power to a foreign nation. We could have plenty of nuclear plants inside the U.S. providing primary power needs to immediate vicinities AND secondary power to remote vicinities. It wouldn’t have to supply all the power needs either.
I’m thinking you don’t care if we replace 100% with nuclear if that isn’t workable. I’ll bet you’d just like to see as much produced with nuclear that is reasonably possible, so we could cut 25, 45, perhaps even 60% of the energy needs, helping us to end our dependence on foreign oil.
I’ve noticed something very strange going on. Every single energy proposal that doesn’t address oil as the main source, is resoundly trashed here.
I have yet to see one thing that anyone proposed that received any respect. Why is that?
I’m not buying that oil is the only reasonable energy source.
>> Unlike other forms of power generation, nuclear reactors are designed to run flat-out, 24/7 — they can’t crank up their output at times of high demand or ease up when demand slows.
This is bull.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.