McCain says wants 45 new nuclear reactors by 2030

Reuters ^

[Sub-Driver]

McCain says wants 45 new nuclear reactors by 2030 Wed Jun 18, 2008 3:49pm EDT

SPRINGFIELD, Missouri (Reuters) - Republican John McCain would put the United States on course to build 45 new nuclear reactors by 2030 if elected president, the Arizona senator said on Wednesday.

[Uncle Miltie]

An intellectually coherent policy from McCain! He must be on his meds again.

[cake_crumb]

I hope he has more success than President Bush in getting them built.

[cake_crumb]

"He must be on his meds again"

I hope he stays on 'em!

[mo]

IMHO, we need about 50...say by 2011......at a bare minimum. BTW...any body ‘round here know exactly wheat this outfit is supposed to be doing for We the People.......

http://www.doe.gov/

[NeoCaveman]

Can we build nuke plants?

YES WE CAN!

[I still care]

The Dems talk about it and Conservatives DO it.

This is REAL hope and change, isn’t it?

[Jo Nuvark]

McCain seems to be coming toward the light of conservatism.

1. He told Obama he was just like Carter.
2. He’s calling for offshore drilling.
3. He never turned Billy Graham down. That was a media lie.
4. He’s considering the governor from Alaska as VP
5. He’s calling for 45 nuke plants by 2030

[C210N]

The ‘Rats are running on a platform of adding “Decommissioned” to the list below on the lines that do not already have that:

NRC Region One (Northeast)

* Beaver Valley, Pennsylvania
* Calvert Cliffs, Maryland
* Connecticut Yankee, Connecticut (Decommissioned)
* FitzPatrick, New York
* Bear Creek, New York
* Hope Creek, New Jersey
* Indian Point, New York
* Limerick, Pennsylvania
* Maine Yankee, Maine (Decommissioned)
* Millstone, Connecticut
* Nine Mile Point, New York
* Oyster Creek, New Jersey
* Peach Bottom, Pennsylvania
* Pilgrim, Massachusetts
* Salem, New Jersey
* Saxton, Pennsylvania (Decommissioned)
* Seabrook, New Hampshire
* Shippingport, Pennsylvania (Decommissioned)
* Shoreham, New York (Decommissioned)
* Susquehanna, Pennsylvania
* Three Mile Island, Pennsylvania
* Vermont Yankee, Vermont
* Yankee Rowe, Massachusetts (Decommissioned)

[edit] NRC Region Two (South)

* Bellefonte, Alabama (Unfinished)
* Browns Ferry, Alabama
* Brunswick, North Carolina
* Carolinas-Virginia Tube Reactor, South Carolina (decommissioned)
* Catawba, South Carolina
* Crystal River 3, Florida
* Farley (Joseph M. Farley), Alabama
* Hatch (Edwin I. Hatch), Georgia
* McGuire, North Carolina
* North Anna, Virginia
* Oconee, South Carolina
* Virgil C. Summer, South Carolina
* Plant Vogtle, Georgia
* H.B. Robinson, South Carolina
* Sequoyah, Tennessee
* Shearon Harris, North Carolina
* St. Lucie, Florida
* Surry, Virginia
* Turkey Point, Florida (hit by Hurricane Andrew)
* Watts Bar, Tennessee

[edit] NRC Region Three (Midwest)

* Byron, Illinois
* Braidwood, Illinois
* Clinton, Illinois
* Davis-Besse, Ohio
* Donald C. Cook, Michigan
* Dresden, Illinois
* Duane Arnold, Iowa
* Elk River, Minnesota (Decommissioned)
* Enrico Fermi, Michigan
* Kewaunee, Wisconsin
* La Crosse, Wisconsin (Decommissioned)
* LaSalle County, Illinois
* Marble Hill, Indiana (Unfinished)
* Monticello, Minnesota
* Palisades, Michigan
* Perry, Ohio
* Piqua, Ohio (Decommissioned)
* Point Beach, Wisconsin
* Prairie Island, Minnesota
* Quad Cities, Illinois
* Zion, Illinois (Decommissioned)

[edit] NRC Region Four (West)

* Arkansas Nuclear One, Arkansas
* Callaway, Missouri
* Columbia, Washington - formerly WNP-2
* Comanche Peak, Texas
* Cooper, Nebraska
* Diablo Canyon, California
* Fort Calhoun, Nebraska
* Fort Saint Vrain, Colorado (Decommissioned)
* Grand Gulf, Mississippi
* Hallam, Nebraska (Decommissioned)
* Hanford N Reactor, Washington (Retired - see Plutonium Production Reactors below)
* Humboldt Bay, California (Decommissioned)
* Palo Verde, Arizona
* Pathfinder, South Dakota (Decommissioned)
* Rancho Seco, California (Decommissioned)
* River Bend, Louisiana
* San Onofre, California
* Santa Susana, California (Closed 1957)
* South Texas, Texas
* Trojan, Rainier, Oregon (Decommissioned)
* UMR, Missouri
* Vallecitos, California (idle research center)
* Waterford, Louisiana
* Wolf Creek, Kansas

[NeoCaveman]

This is REAL hope and change, isn’t it?

This is real change I can beleive in.

[TexasCajun]

Why our party leaders aren't on TV and Radio every day explaining to the sheeple that high energy cost are part of the Democrat Plan to force American consumers to reduce their greedy indulgences and save Mother Earth for Algore.

This situation is totally on the Democrats backs but our side is too coward to blame them publicly.

[pgkdan]

I hope he has more success than President Bush in getting them built.

It's a whole new world when gas is $4.00 a gallon or more, diesel's pushing $4.50 and home utility bills are rising an average of 36%. He'll have to fight for it but anything that helps reduce our dependence on foreign oil will be a hit with the voters this year.

[TheDon]

John must be reading my FR posts. If he keeps this up, he will win in a landslide.

[ishabibble]

ATTA BOY JOHNNY!

[TheWasteLand]

Finally something I can get on board with. It’s about time.

[RS_Rider]

License has been granted for the first nuclear reactor to be built in the past 25+ years, I’d say that’s a good start!

[BallyBill]

Instead of voting against Obama, I might be able to vote for McCain.

[Bigun]

According to Electric Power Monthly published by the Energy Information administration, about 20% of our current electrical power is generated using natural gas and other petroleum products for fuel. A little over 50% using coal. All of these hydrocarbons would be much more effectively used if we had a well thought out, long term, national energy strategy. It is an absolute embarrassment that the FRENCH long ago figured this out and we have not yet!

I'm with you on this one John!

[cake_crumb]

"It's a whole new world when gas is $4.00 a gallon or more, diesel's pushing $4.50 and home utility bills are rising an average of 36%. He'll have to fight for it but anything that helps reduce our dependence on foreign oil will be a hit with the voters this year."

Yes, it's amazing how not being able to afford to buy gas, pay your utilities AND buy food can concentrate the old rationality centers of the brain.

[Sgt_Schultze]

This is good news. The federal government should make the design template for facilities universal. That would make local resistance less successful. If the plans were pre-approved and pre-approved modules could be added for additional capacity, the costs would be lessened and startup delay reduced.

[lormand]

To be fair, I will post an agreement I have with Senator McCain.

[ishmac]

There's a strong opportunistic streak in McCain. The energy issue is too big to pass up on. I figured he'd throw the "greenie" stuff out if a bigger opportunity presented itself.

Not that I mind, if he's doing the right thing. McCain can be pressured to do the right thing in certain cases and this appears to be one of them. And I won't be joining those whose response to McCain's turnabout is to snarl and call him a flip-flopper. With McCain, I don't care why he does the right thing, as long as he does it.

[tumblindice]

He’s toying with us or he has an identical conservative twin.
Tomorrow, evil twin will be pushing Kyoto.

[Neidermeyer]

Yes, it’s amazing how not being able to afford to buy gas, pay your utilities AND buy food can concentrate the old rationality centers of the brain.
*********************************************
If McCain just goes one more step and ties it all together then we’ve got something ... 30+ years of saying “NO” to all production ,, then putting huge pressure on food crops to make ethanol ,, now corn is toast in Iowa and elsewhere ... the libs think nobody’s been paying attention but the message is just too simple (elegant?) to misconstrue ... drill now , produce more ,, pay less ...

YOU CANNOT WIN OF YOU DO NOT PLAY!

[Ranger Warrior]

Yeah, keep driving your points home John McCain. Let the Dems sit around in a circle and sing “Kumbuya” while the price of energy soars. Keep reminding voters John McCain that the Dems are screwing up the economy big time.

[DoughtyOne]

45 by 2030

What a visionary! Within a generation John wants us to have less viable nuclear energy output than we need now.

In a word, pathetic. This guy can’t even pander with conviction.

[cake_crumb]

Exactly!

[cake_crumb]

They’re not exactly cheap to build.

[pgkdan]

Yep...kind of realigns one’s perspective and changes his priorities, doesn’t it?

[isrul]

Nah. Somebody wrote it for him. The real immediate problems are first: fuel to power vehicles and second fuel to heat/cool homes. Nuclear power may help somewhat in the latter if homes are heated with electricity. But the fuel for vehicle effects the price of everything and needs to be addressed not only in the long term but also in the short term. And the problem of heating homes also needs both short and long term solutions.

Immediate action that produces immediate results is essential to avert some real serious problems for the American people that loom on the very near horizon. I don't think any politicians have the intelligence to really address the issue.

This is really an issue of survival for many of our fellow citizens.

[Prokopton]

McCain says wants 45 new nuclear reactors by 2030

That's about right, around one new nuclear plant for every 500,000 illegal aliens new citizens.

[DoughtyOne]

Most of the reason why they aren’t cheap to build is government and activist related. If the government made it a top priority and gave the manufacturers protection from frivelous lawsuits, the job could be done a lot sooner. This should be a national priority of the highest order.

IMO, we could achieve all we needed to in five to seven years, if we put our mind to it. Most certainly by the end of ten years, we could have resolved the issue.

We aren’t going to. McCain’s suggestion of 45 units by 2030 is woefully inadequate. It’s an olive leaf to those who support sulf-sufficiency, but it’s not much more.

Is it a step in the right direction. Well yes, it will be better to have 45 units in 2030 that we might not have had otherwise. It could also mislead folks into thinking this was the promised land we all were looking forward to, and cause folks to relax their demands to get us to self-sifficiency. And that would be terrible.

[appleharvey]

That should have been called for 35 years ago.

[JLS]

If there is any difference in success it will be due to the price of gasoline, not the personalities.

[Stentor]

Immediate action that produces immediate results is essential to avert some real serious problems for the American people that loom on the very near horizon.

Like what? (serious not sarcastic question)

[DoughtyOne]

France with a population of around 63 million today has 59 nuclear reactors.  It's nuclear facilities provide 75% of it's power.

The United States currently has 104 commerical nuclear reactors providing energy.  (good link, lots of information regarding U.S. nuclear plant technology, the licensing approval and construction process)

Now, does 45 new facilites for the United States by 2030 sound sufficient for what will probably be 400 million plus by then?  I don't think so.

[isrul]

I don't have an answer. But unlike most politicians, I do recognize the problem. The prices of virtually everything rising because of fuel costs could become a lot more than a problem. It very well may become a catastrophe for millions of Americans. And the issue of fuel to heat may actually cause deaths.

The prices need to come down. How? This didn't come about through a natural free market or supply and demand. It came about through govt. policy and speculators. It won't solve itself. If there is enough oil available for the oil companies to export, that cannot continue if Americans are unable to feed, clothe or warm their homes.

I remember the fuel situations in the seventies. This is way beyond that. It's an extraordinary situation that may quickly escalate to an economic disaster.

We seem to be governed by people who are actually not sane.

[Stentor]

We seem to be governed by people who are actually not sane.

Absolutely. I think you meant to say that they're freaking nuts.

[Misschuck]

We seem to be governed by people who are actually not sane.
Absolutely. I think you meant to say that they’re freaking nuts

Bought and paid for.

[SuziQ]

45 sounds good to me. Each state should have at least one, and with that, the transmission distance wouldn't have to be so large. This would also reduce the load along those lines, which is a major reason for blackouts and brownouts.

These don't have to be behemoths. The technology has improved considerably in the last 30 years; they could be built smaller for the same amount of output.

[isrul]

Yeah. That works for me :)

[EagleandLiberty]

Connecticut Yankee, Connecticut (Decommissioned)

That plant was the best run plant. I lived near it and camped on an island near it. Connecticut Yankee closed because the life expectancy was up. Connecticut gets 65% of its power from nuclear.

[SuziQ]

This list of reactors in the South doesn’t include the facility at Port Gibson, MS. I think that utility is fixing to start a second reactor at the site.

[krb]

Not so much a visionary in the sarcastic sense, as a guy who has studied what it takes to get a plant built and brought online.

[DoughtyOne]

See if you like this any better.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2032960/posts?page=36#36

[Squantos]

McCain must be reading my posts here at FR !

Scoundrel !

100 new refineries, 100 new nuclear reactors, ground nasa and restrict funding too the national labs until they develop a carburetor for standard V8 engine that gets 100 miles per gallon minimum !

Cheap energy will make America and it’s people richer in all aspect of their lives !

Versus the BS we’re getting from congress these days that is richer than six foot up a bulls butt !

And of course make Eaker the next Governor of Texas........:o)

[DoughtyOne]

I think these cover my thoughts on this subject from most angles. See what you think.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2032960/posts?page=26#26

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2032960/posts?page=32#32

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2032960/posts?page=36#36

[hiredhand]

Perhaps McCain could try the novel approach of simply upholding the United States Constitution?

NAH!

He'll say anything to get elected. His history sucks though, and unfortunately nothing can change that before November of 2008.

[Squantos]

Yep never ever vote on a polidiots promises !

Vote on their record !

Stay safe !

[MileHi]

100 new refineries, 100 new nuclear reactors, ground nasa and restrict funding too the national labs until they develop a carburetor for standard V8 engine that gets 100 miles per gallon minimum !

And drill wherever we can in the mean time. But the seditious SOBs won't!

And of course make Eaker the next Governor of Texas

And yea, dammit, that too! {:0)