I can always find material by checking out letters written to the Atlanta Urinal and Constipation.
If the American public is really supporting nuclear power, as Nolan E. Hertel asserts, it is because it is being misled ("Has the time come for nuclear power? Yes," @issue, July 27).
Just like this letter writer has been misled which she will prove later in this letter.
Hertel says that nuclear energy only costs 1.7 cents per kilowatt-hour. He is only considering the cost of the fuel. He is not including the capital cost of building the plants, now estimated to be up to $12 billion per reactor.
Even factoring that in nuke plants are still cheaper than solar or wind. That is why both of those have to be subsidized by the gummint to compete.
In addition, operating costs, waste management, decommissioning and externalities bring the true cost of nuclear-generated electricity up to approximately 30 cents per kilowatt-hour.
Yada. Yada. Yada. Blah. Blah. Blah. OK. Let's build more coal fired plants. Oops! This maroon doesn't want those either.
In addition to the cost, nuclear plants take too long to build to be a meaningful solution to global warming. We need to produce 100 percent of our electricity with renewables within 10 years. Nuclear power is not a renewable energy source.JEANNINE HONICKER
LaGrange
Jeannine, you are an idiot! You have been listening to way too much bullshit from Pope Albert I of the Church of AGW. You want to replace all of our coal, gas, and nuclear power plants by wind, solar, and biofuels in ten years. Can you possibly explain exactly how that is gonna be done?
Let's talk about wind. Have you ever been to California? Have you ever passed by a large concentration of windmills in California? I was in California a few years back during the rolling brownouts. I passed by the wind turbines at Altamont Pass. Less than half of them were actually turning. Last year I drove through Palm Springs. The temperature was 110 and the wind was blowing. I saw a lot of wind turbines but very few of them were actually turning. So I really don't think that we're gonna get a whole lot of energy from wind in the next ten years. If we even get up to 5%, it would amaze me. Good luck T. Boone Pickens!
Let's talk solar. We're making great advances in solar technology but to think that it could make a radical increase in power generating capacity in ten years is wishful thinking. Like wind, 5% of our needs would be amazing. Even then, it is only good during the day and when the sun is shining.
Let's talk biofuel. We see what a smashing success ethanol has been. To think that biofuels could even supply 1% of our power needs is a stretch.
So using Miss Rosy Scenario, in ten years renewable sources will supply 11% of our electrical generation needs. Oh heck, since it's Miss Rosy Scenario let's say 20%. Throw in hydroelectric power which currently supplies 7% of our electricity, and we're up to 27%. This is also assuming that demand stays constant, which it will not. So where are we gonna get the other 73%?
I Know! I know! Pick me GOC! I've got the answer. It's Poof! PFM
Idiots like Jeannine who don't want to see nuclear power plants and coal fired power plants as a long term solution to our energy needs and want to see us get to 100% renewable power in ten years need to do their part by not using any electricity at all. If enough booger eatin' moh-rons would do that we might be able to reach 30% of our energy needs using renewables. Let's start with Pope Albert I who is currently using twelve times the energy of an average American family in just one of his three mansions.
Do these people even stop to think before they compose these letters or do they just cut and paste Pope Albert's talking points?
Even if we- in California- produce a whole lotta electricity from windmills- there is no place to "put" that electricity. No capacity to carry it where it has to go. The electric grid is falling apart too. So that is another cost to factor in.
Today on the radio, I happened to hear that 51% of Californians now favor off shore drilling! Let's hope that percentage grows and wasn't just because the airheads were all of town!
did Don Surber coin a new word, or has it already been in use?
Posted by: Daryl on July 31, 2008 07:40 PMWell, I see that there are stupid ass people hugging trees in Georgia just like here in Brother Gore's state of Tennessee. Man, when will these nuts get a clue and stop listening to the "green" kooks?
Posted by: Eddie on July 31, 2008 08:17 PMWind power is just another diversion by the enviro-marxists to make us take our eye off the ball.
We all know that there is no way they (or even sane conservationists) will ever allow wind machines to be installed on every hillcrest in the nation.
Wind power is not cost effective, not reliable, it's ugly, and it kills flying animals.
Posted by: KarlU on July 31, 2008 08:44 PMdaryl-
pardon me. i'm a little slow today. does surber mean to reduce redundancy by having us say goron rather than morons who believe in gore?
if that is his meaning, that is awesome, and i will very much use his efficiency in future posts.
KarlU-
no fig'ring gorons out. each of the alternatives they propose goes against some other lib cause so we should all really go back to living in caves to please 'em. of course, they won't change their lives, they just want you to change yours. and shame on you for not doing it. damnit.
Posted by: Pip on July 31, 2008 09:49 PMand since i've not mentionned it in awhile, i don't won't anyone here to forget the plight of the spineless french crab which (had it not become extinct after d-day) would now be gone due to all the nuclear power in france these days.
Posted by: Pip on July 31, 2008 09:55 PMPip, I think that is the intention. We have Gorons worshiping the Goracle and Obamorons worshiping the Obamassiah.
Posted by: Daryl on July 31, 2008 10:45 PMSolar Power? Give me a break...... Every plant that is in the planning stages is tied up in Environmental Impact Assessments to see if the plant is going to bump a boo-boo on some pest that happens to live in that piece of the God-forsaken wilderness....
One set of Watermelons screams "Build Solar Power Plants" and another set screams "But not *here* in this fragile desert ecosystem" just as loud...
The only ones who win are the lawyers.
I am at a point where I consider it at the very least unpatriotic but approaching treason to those that oppose practical easily implemented alternatives to imported oil. If solar can be ramped up quickly with private investment then it has zero quarrel from me. It would be a preferred source as far as I am concerned.
Reality though rears its head and it is obvious that nuclear, coal and additional gas drilling are the immediate answers that the private sector will support.
Lets go back to public hangings for treason.
Posted by: patrick on July 31, 2008 11:22 PMPip -
Spineless French crabs...Bwahahahahahahahahahahah!
I gotta agree with Carl. We have been building wind farms here in Texas out the ass. The Texas Senate just last week passed a 3 billion(?) dollar proposal for the transmission lines to run from the west Texas wind farms to Dallas. Guess who the first people to oppose it where.
Posted by: kerrcarto on August 1, 2008 01:27 AMWhoops Karl I meant.
Posted by: kerrcarto on August 1, 2008 01:28 AMShe is wrong about nuclear power not being a renewable resource. The technology is there (though I don't think it's quite ready for production) to reuse the nuclear waste as an energy source in the reactor. After using the waste again, it gives off harmful levels of radiation for only a few years.
Posted by: Blake on August 1, 2008 08:18 AM"Spineless French crabs???"
You could be describing anyone in the whole French nation.
Posted by: Toejam on August 1, 2008 09:20 AMThe only ones who win are the lawyers.
Now THERE'S an energy source we haven't tapped. One lawyer has to be full of enough "biofuel" to run a factory. And there seems to be an endless supply of the damned things ...
I think we should designate all law schools as official radioactive waste storage sites.
They're already full of toxic waste.
Posted by: Rick T on August 1, 2008 09:06 PMFYI, Denny...it's my understanding that the so-called "Pickens Plan" is advocating windmills in along the center of the country (not in California). Apparently the area's a natural wind tunnel of sorts. That said, I don't know whether or not his target of around 20% is feasible but if private companies want to try it, I say go for it. Plus, there's no reason we can't also start off-shore drilling as well.
Posted by: zonker on August 3, 2008 05:54 PMNuclear power, more drilling, more coal plants are the answer in the short term, then get busy finding more alternative sources (that will work). My best friend growing up, his father was a nuclear physicist and professor at the local college. He always complained that nuclear power was cleaner and more efficient than anything else out there. About the waste he had a few options but one he thought had promise beyond the current methods was to load used fuel rods in canisters on a rocket ship and send it to the sun.
Interesting theory it was proposed by Ansel Adams the photographer/environmentalist, imagine that!
Posted by: Scott on August 4, 2008 05:13 PMI'm thinking about planting about 4 hunert pinwheels (with Pelosi's face printed on them)in my front yard. Then, I'll go inflate my tires, put on a sweater, and make sure that my piano is properly tuned. I'll pray to Mother (earth) for my forgiveness for merely breathing and await the end times. Good Farking Gawd, these people are complete Motards.
Posted by: LisaKay on August 5, 2008 08:50 AM