Home | About | Donate

New York's "Clean" Energy Plan Props Up Dirty, Dangerous Nuclear Power


#1

New York's "Clean" Energy Plan Props Up Dirty, Dangerous Nuclear Power

Deirdre Fulton, staff writer

New York state's Clean Energy Standard (CES), approved Monday, is being hailed as a "monumental step forward" toward a renewable energy future.


#2

What short memories...does Three Mile Island ring a bell? Pennsylvania, 1979: http://www.history.com/topics/three-mile-island Or, how about Love Canal (Niagara Falls, NY) in the 1970's: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_Canal
Nuclear power leaves a HUGE environmental footprint and enough waste to outlast the planet Earth. The soil, water, and air are all victims of nuclear operations. People and all life are simply afterthoughts.

Is "Clean" nuclear power like "Clean" coal? Oxymoronic.


#4

Thank you Good People for being there. The nuclear lie is so damn embarrassing to those responsible, that they shamefully cover their eyes, ears and hearts. Despicable.


#5

Boiling water with a bomb.

What a concept.
(what could go wrong?)

http://planetofthebushapes.wikidot.com/nuclear-power-incidents


#7

A kid, is like a bag-boy who hasn't been to college. Do you know
anybody like that? Someone who spams disinformation about technologies that he doesn't understand? :wink:

But he loves them anyway since he reads popular science and thinks we
are all going to live on the Moon pretty soon and colonizing space
thanks to the Magic Atom and our new-fangled inventions.

Come back and talk to us after you complete a science degree or have some experience handling nuclear materials, O.K.?

Nuclear power is dangerous and un-affordable. Putting a piece of a
star in your back yard is so fraught with hazard, that the only reason
we survived so far as humans up to 1940 was because the only one was 86
million miles away from us. Now we are all in constant danger of
nuclear holocaust from NPP's and war.

If you'd had college level Earth Science or Astronomy or Biological Anthropology you'd know this.

But if the subject is groceries, or how to mop up isle number nine,
we'll listen to you, since you may know something about those subjects.
But you are wrong about energy. Enough sunlight falls on this Earth to
power all our needs many times over. Solar and Wind can do it all.

Big Corps, however, don't want power sources controlled by the
masses. That's the only reason stupid billion dollars plants are hawked
to a gullible science illiterate population.


#8

You know, our currently used Nuclear power electric generation source was designed decades ago. It has proved to be very dangerous. Natural events occur, and when they do all the circumventing technology may not stop a major issue. BUT there are other nuclear power designs that are much safer. The Liquid Salt Thorium reactor is one such design. It's basic design was thrown on the heap of unused designs back in the '50's because it does not produce weaponizable waste products == no good for military. Once started it uses plentiful thorium for fuel. Due to it's breeder type cycle it produces it's own fissionable Uranium from thorium and then converts it back to depleted Uranium with a huge amount of heat energy as a byproduct. Very little waste product. AND in the event of a issue there is NO high pressure/high temp water to blow up. There is NO possibility of the China syndrome. Why hasn't this tech been used in our power industry? China is actively researching it from our old notes. WTF?? How stupid we capitalists are. Not enough money to be made in the reprocess business i guess.


#9

WOW!

All our problems are solved! You forgot to throw in the the lie that "It's too cheap to meter!"

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I give you the Magic Bullet Thorium Reactor. Which has never been built since the simulated one at Oakridge contaminated everything and became Betchel's most expensive clean up in history. The Magic Bullet Thorium Reactor, Folks! (which is a lie because what jwschull forgot to tell you is that it has a dangerous Uranium-233/235 reactor at it's core which can blow up, and that his bright idea of piping liquid fuel all over the place means the damn thing is already melted down just waiting to leak into the environment.) Oh, and as an added benefit, trains and trucks bringing nuke waste from all over the country to this new scam are going to be crashing right behind your very houses!

If you had some other snake oil to sell us jwschull, what would it be?


#10

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#11

Career politician NY Governor Andy Cuomo runs NY to further his bloated ambition and DINO DLC pattern of serving big-money and profits-over-people - using taxpayers as a piggy-bank for his policies and a vindictive nature to bluster his way forward.

The nuclear tax saddle's taxpayers with support for aged deadly nuke plants, a dead-end technology with no safe place or plan to dispose of nuclear waste - a corrupt, politically motivated direction. Taxpayers now forced to bail-out plant operators will bear billions in costs of clean-up of plant sites - that can be delayed up to 60 years after plants shut-down under the "SAFSTOR" scam!
Cuomo commits NY until 2030 and beyond for billions, derailing shift to clean renewable, safe, energy.
A byproduct of Cuomo's nuclear bailout rip-off will delay shut-down and clean-up of "the most dangerous nuke plant in America" Indian Point!

http://www.politico.com/states/new-york/albany/story/2016/07/cuomo-administration-nuclear-proposal-will-cost-ratepayers-billions-103703

Examples of Cuomo's other betrayals include Property Tax Reform, Non-Partisan redistricting, Disbanding the Moorland Commission, Campaign Finance Reform, Restoring Fair Taxation on Wealthy, Medicinal Cannabis CCA Charade, and conspiring with Republicans to assure "gridlock" in NY's "do-nothing" part-time Legislature. His collusion with convicted felons Sheldon Silver and Dean Skelos should make Cuomo the next charged with official crimes, corruption and conflicts of interest!



#12

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#13

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#14

Cool link aligatorhardt,

That's so cool I'm going to put up the relevant chart:


Click on the lower right hand corner <-> symbol to enlarge

Guys, nuke power won't work since we will run out of Uranium in about ten years or so. As you can see, the other poster was wrong in his claim that solar can not supply all our needs. In Fact, Solar can supply more than 1000 times our needs today.


#15

Thank’s for the education my friend. Sounds like the video’s about the Thorium reactor not making bomb making material were false. Not that that’s a big issue IF it allows for sustainable energy. Hmmmm… Who to believe? I guess we could say stay with solar and be safe… at least until the solar cycle enters it’s low point, which we are entering now. Geothermal and wind ? I think the weather will get worse == more harvestable wind power.


#16

Opinions vary. Why do you say it can blow up? It’s NOT under pressure, just heat.


#17

Because Einstein,

ALL nuke piles have to be cooled. If the cooling stops (which it will, as ALL systems man builds occasionally fail) it will thermally run away, and you'll get a prompt criticallity and kamblamo.

And knowing you guys, to cut corners you'll store 20 years of dangerous fuel rods on top of the reactor again and another ocean will die completely off like the Pacific is now dying from Fukushima's "one-in-a-million" chance of meltdown (times four if you count Unit 4's building which the nuke industry said couldn't blow up.)

What a great idea! Hey I know! Let's trust the same guys and same companies again who destroyed the Pacific and are presently causing fallout all across the USA!

What could possibly go wrong! It could never have a leak of the liquid nuke fuel! That's impossible with our magic catch box at the bottom!


#18

Your post shows a complete lack of understanding as to how a nuclear reactor, using minimally enriched uranium (or in the case of Canada's CANDU reactors, unenriched - which are the main reason that Toronto is a near zero-carbon powered city) works. A nuclear power reactor is about a similar to a nuclear bomb as a fire log is to TNT.


#19

No. Wrong. Please find a basic primer of the physics of nuclear reactions and read it.


#20

There is nothing dirty or dangerous about nuclear power. It's injury and fatality rate (for the entire fuel cycle) is better than any other way of generating electricity. It's total life-cycle carbon footprint is comparable to or better than wind or solar.


#21

TJ says:
Great, the hapless government man from the coal department has arrived. You've lost every nuke argument you've ever had on this board since you don't have even a rudimentary grasp of the real nuclear world (not the theoretical.)

For example,
You claim that Toronto is some kind of nuclear utopia. Let's examine the real world, shall we Yunzer? The real safety record of that industry in Toronto:

December 12, 1952 — INES Level 5 - Chalk River, Ontario, Canada - Reactor core damaged

A reactor shutoff rod failure, combined with several operator errors,
led to a major power excursion of more than double the reactor's rated
output at AECL's NRX reactor. The operators purged the reactor's heavy
water moderator, and the reaction stopped in under 30 seconds. A cover
gas system failure led to hydrogen explosions, which severely damaged
the reactor core. The fission products from approximately 30 kg of
uranium were released through the reactor stack. Irradiated light-water
coolant leaked from the damaged coolant circuit into the reactor
building; some 4,000 cubic meters were pumped via pipeline to a disposal
area to avoid contamination of the Ottawa River.

May 24, 1958 — INES Level needed - Chalk River, Ontario, Canada - Fuel damaged

Due to inadequate cooling a damaged uranium fuel rod caught fire and was
torn in two as it was being removed from the core at the NRU reactor.
The fire was extinguished, but not before radioactive combustion
products contaminated the interior of the reactor building and to a
lesser degree, an area surrounding the laboratory site. Over 600 people
were employed in the clean-up.[3][4]

Theoretically, the nuke industry claimed the odds of a meltdown like this was one in a million. In reality we now average one every eight years. The bad news for the down-winders is that BOTH a nuke bomb and a nuke power plant disperse Pu-239 when they blow up.

Your body doesn't know the difference between Pu-239 inhaled from a bomb or a nuke power plant. In fact, the NPP is much more dangerous than a bomb since a bomb only contains about one pound of plutonium. A nuke power plant like Fukushima had hundreds of tons of Pu-239 laced nuke fuel sitting on top of Units 1 through 6 carelessly swinging in the breeze 100 feet up in the air above a loaded gun: The Reactor core.

I'd say my description of boiling water with a bomb was way understated.


#22

TJ says:
What a bunch of lies from the same guy who told us that there were no coal beds in Montana and no gasoline or cars in the Philippines! Chernobyl alone killed almost a million people, and even today no one can set foot on the contaminated ground the size of the state of Alabama. The cost was so great, according to Micheal Gorbachoff in his memoirs, that it destoyed the entire USSR.

Never does the nuke mob count the millions of vehicles and billions of dollars that poor taxpayers and ratepayers have to employ for 40 years of each and every decommissioned nuke plant. The nuke industry privatizes the profits and socializes the never-ending nuke storage costs for 24,000 years. It's a terrorism hazard for that many years and must be guarded.


click on the lower right <-> symbol to expand.
The dark red is the exclusion zone where no one can live for the next 1200-600 years, depending on the contamination measured.