07-29-10, 08:16 AM | #1 |
Super Moderator
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 964
Thanks: 189
Thanked 111 Times in 87 Posts
|
Study: Solar power is cheaper than nuclear
Study: Solar power is cheaper than nuclear
I found that link here. I do hope that this will spawn more solar investments. |
07-29-10, 09:37 AM | #2 |
Lex Parsimoniae
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Woburn, MA
Posts: 4,918
Thanks: 114
Thanked 250 Times in 230 Posts
|
I read the Reply post at Atomic Insights Blog: Gullible Reporting By New York Times On the Cost of Solar Electricity Versus Nuclear Electricity
It makes a pretty good case against the 'study' being realistic. Since it cost much more money (lawyer's fees) to build a Nuke plant in the USA, compared to France. We will never have any useful amount of Nukes in the USA. Almost any other source of power will be more competitive. Maybe even solar. Unless, activist hire lawyers to attack PV farm construction. (I think an anti-PV Farm movement has already started). The legal cost of solar could go very high. (Like wind farms are incurring). If they are successful in halting most large scale PV, they might also want to go after smaller scale PV, if the owners are seen as having the money to make it worth the effort. IMHO, some of the American Green activist against coal and nuclear, are also anti-large scale power generation of any type. |
08-17-10, 10:42 AM | #3 | |
Supreme EcoRenovator
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 4,004
Thanks: 303
Thanked 724 Times in 534 Posts
|
Quote:
The dirty secret regarding nuclear energy is that there is NO safe level of radiation exposure. All nuke plants leak some amount of radiation. Any exposure to radiation will cause a statistical increase in cancer rates. If it's happening to you or someone you love, the statistics are hard to ignore. I wish I could take comfort in this, but since the nuclear industry thrives on secrecy and huge budgets and more importantly, since we now use nuclear waste in munitions it will continue. Since you're pretty handy with INTERNET searches, you should do a bit of research on
Just knowing this should be enough reason to shut down all nuclear plants. -AC_Hacker |
|
08-17-10, 11:02 AM | #4 |
Lex Parsimoniae
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Woburn, MA
Posts: 4,918
Thanks: 114
Thanked 250 Times in 230 Posts
|
We've had our own problems with organic pollution right here..
http://www.mass.gov/Eeohhs2/docs/dph...study_1997.pdf We even had a movie made about it.. A Civil Action: Before the book and before the movie I have to wonder about the cause of cancer in Iraq, since it's pretty unlikely the poor families ever got to see a doctor before we got there.. Meaning their cancer rates might have been higher or lower before the war. Anyways, we don't have to worry about nuke plants here in America. That's not going to happen until we have about 95 years of data on French cancer rates! Actually, if we were power starved in 2099ish and started considering building plants, all it would take is one dead Frenchman to shut the idea down.. We've got mountains of coal.. And, it's not so bad.. Right? Last edited by Xringer; 08-17-10 at 11:17 AM.. |
08-17-10, 12:04 PM | #5 | |||
Supreme EcoRenovator
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 4,004
Thanks: 303
Thanked 724 Times in 534 Posts
|
Sorry your community went through this. There's a super-fund site 8 blocks from where I live. It's leaching poisons into the river near my house. No super funds have ever appeared, I doubt they ever will.
Quote:
Quote:
In 2008, the KiKK study in Germany reported a 1.6-fold increase in solid cancers and a 2.2-fold increase in leukemias among children living within 5 km of all German nuclear power stations. I saw another report that concluded that in spite of the problems the Germans were having, there was no problems were found among the French. Closer inspection showed that the second report was done by a group influenced by the French nuke industry. Quote:
Thanks for offering to substitute one abysmal practice for another. No thanks. I'd rather change my energy consumption habits as if it really mattered, because it really does matter. There was a nuke plant on the 100 year flood plain about 20 miles upwind from my house. Fortunately, here in Oregon we have enough brave, intelligent, ethical souls who were willing to sacrifice years of their lives and what little money they had, fighting the nuke industry. They won, we won, the nuke is gone. These are the kind of people I respect, people with ethics and intelligence who are willing to take a stand. -AC_Hacker Last edited by AC_Hacker; 08-17-10 at 12:33 PM.. |
|||
08-17-10, 01:53 PM | #6 |
Lex Parsimoniae
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Woburn, MA
Posts: 4,918
Thanks: 114
Thanked 250 Times in 230 Posts
|
Hey, coal is what we have now and it's what we will always have, since law suits make change impossible..
I skimmed some of the data in the studies. But, I was nagged by the idea that some particle (ionizing radiation?) could get out of a shielded reactor and zing the cells in a child or embryo, 2 or 3 miles away.. While in the navy, I was very near a bunch of nuclear weapons and a few nuclear power plants, off and on for 4 years. I wonder if any of my buddies who sailed on nuke boats are still alive?? How do they get people to volunteer for subs or any nuke powered ships?? Maybe I should do some more reading.. No Excess Mortality Risk Found - National Cancer Institute Cross-check: Nuclear fall in: Why I'm becoming a pro-nuke nut |
|
|