Comments on: Boehner: Energy Subsidies “Wrong” (& Can I Please Have a $2-Billion Loan Guarantee for a Nuclear Power Plant?)

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 03 Nov 2011 23:16:00 +0000

ah, woops, thanks!

By: BlueRock

BlueRock — Thu, 03 Nov 2011 12:15:00 +0000

Zachary,

Small correction: it’s not a nuke plant, it’s a nuke *enrichment* plant. http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/10/28/356141/boehner-loan-guarantee-wrong/

Cheers,

David.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 31 Oct 2011 18:21:00 +0000

Thanks, I believe it!

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 31 Oct 2011 18:21:00 +0000

That’s the question. Nukes really don’t survive on their own, but their funders also fund politicians..

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 31 Oct 2011 17:56:00 +0000

http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2010/02/17/17climatewire-doe-delivers-its-first-long-awaited-nuclear-71731.html

Considering that offshore wind, and many other renewables, provide cheaper electricity than nukes, why are we doing nukes?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/mar/17/wind-cheaper-nuclear-eu-climate

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 31 Oct 2011 17:49:00 +0000

Actually, if you count the health care costs for the injured veterans, plus a lot of other costs associated with Bush’s wars, we will wind up spending about $3.7 trillion.

http://costsofwar.org/

Further: “While we know how many US soldiers have died in the wars (just over 6000), what is startling is what we don’t know about the levels of injury and illness in those who have returned from the wars. New disability claims continue to pour into the VA, with 550,000 just through last fall. Many deaths and injuries among US contractors have not been identified.”

We need to occupy the voting booth to get more and BETTER Democrats…

By: j

Sun, 30 Oct 2011 14:51:00 +0000

Reelections are coming- reelections are coming! These people may be all the posts say but they are not fail safe. They can be voted out and replaced with a fresh batch. Just maybe the voters will get a good one, Its our turn for something/somebody better.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 30 Oct 2011 06:05:00 +0000

Thank, Ed. I’m shocked that they said it’s faster. I don’t buy that for a second, unless they’re comparing it to Cape Wind

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 30 Oct 2011 04:56:00 +0000

hmm, i’m seeing many reports that it’s over 50%. maybe those are just *projected* failure rates?..

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 29 Oct 2011 17:52:00 +0000

Ticked, I believe my post says 520 billion could put a $40,000 solar unit on almost every house in the country, and another 520 could add a lot of wind generators. I’m not a math genius when it comes to that many zero’s after a number, but I thought 520 billion plus 520 billion was just over a trillion. At any rate, I totally agree with you, the 1 trillion number, one that is commonly spouted by our war mongering politicians is a low ball number. I was trying to keep my post short as possible. Like you, I am well aware of all the other costs that go with the figures the government gives us, like long term health care for those who were permanently injured, that alone will add up into the billions.

By: tickedofftwice

tickedofftwice — Sat, 29 Oct 2011 16:38:00 +0000

Where did you get your numbers? We’ve spent FAR more than 520 billion in Iraq and Afganistan. We are currently spending 1.5 Billion/week in Afganistan. All told we have spent over 1 trillion in those two countries alone since Bush started his wars. That does NOT include what we have spent at home on stuff like airport security, spying on US citizens and the NSA, just to name a few.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 29 Oct 2011 10:25:00 +0000

Another fine article Zach! One can’t blame a representative asking for and legislating for money for their home state, after all, this is part of what gets them re-elected. But to ask for money for the nuclear power industry is ill conceived! Perhaps we could explore that avenue after all clean and renewable energy sources are exhausted. But we’ve barely begun to even tap that source.

I suppose a 50% failure rate is not so bad for venture capital. When it comes to nuclear engergy, neither the big banks on Wall St, nor private venture firms will touch it! Raising venture capital for energy companies is not our politicians area of expertise, and they should not be involved in it. The federal government guaranteeing loans is a large part of what has got our economy in the condition we are in now!

Most new companies that fail, do so, because they borrow too much money to get started, and eventually the debt crushes them. People are not as responsible with borrowed money. Even less responsible if it is guaranteed by the government. Guaranteeing loans is a losing proposition, the banks reap the profits if the loan succeeds, and reap the profits if it fails. We the tax payer pay the losses, and the odds of doing so are high. There is no incentive for the business to succeed, because whether they do or they don’t, it matters not. These types of loan guarantees by the Federal Government are Central Planning, and Socialism at its finest!

One only need to look at the continuing costs of cleaning up the Hanford site in Washington St., to see the track record of government and nuclear fission.

There are approximately 130 million single family homes in the US, for 520 billion we could put a $40,000 solar unit on every one of them! Another 520 billion would add a fair number of wind generators! That’s about what we have spent so far in Iraq and Afghanistan.