Comments on: US Nuclear Power In Decline

By: Doug

Doug — Thu, 26 Sep 2013 13:14:00 +0000

Years ago I favored nuclear as a technological solution to both energy independence and pollution. However, it’s now very clear that nuclear is hidiously expensive and creates even worse problems when things go wrong – not to mention that there is still no good way to store nuclear waste.

For the money, rather than build nuclear plants, investment in renewables is a real winner – and has no obvious downsides.

By: Mark Goldes

Mark Goldes — Fri, 20 Sep 2013 14:58:00 +0000

Nuclear power can be left behind much more rapidly
than might be imagined.

Revolutionary new technologies are en-route that can turn future cars into
power plants, able to sell electricity when suitably parked. No wires needed. Cars,
trucks and buses might even pay for themselves.

Since these are hard to believe breakthroughs, a surprise could increase
support for the best of them.

An engine has been invented that needs no fuel. It could trigger a perpetual
commotion.

See NO FUEL ENGINE at http://www.aesopinstitute.org

Since these engines will not get hot, after a prototype is validated by an
independent lab, small plastic desktop piston engines are planned that will run
a radio and recharge cell phones.

Metal versions are expected to power homes 24/7 and replace diesel generators.
They also will provide emergency generators – and an on-board recharge for some electric cars. Later replacing wind turbines of all sizes.

Making the “impossible” possible will open a practical path to rapid
reduction in the need nuclear plants.

And open the way to support for other revolutionary new science that can
cost-competitively supersede the need for fossil and radioactive fuels.

See CHEAP GREEN and MOVING BEYOND OIL on the AESOP Institute website for a few examples.

By: Ronald Brakels

Ronald Brakels — Fri, 20 Sep 2013 14:08:00 +0000

To cut carbon emissions quickly, instead of building a new nuclear reactor to replace an old one, what needs to be done is to build renewable generating capacity instead. This is because renewable energy such as wind and solar is cheaper than new nuclear. Money invested in wind and solar will generate more kilowatt-hours than the same amount invested in a nuclear plant. So if there is a choice between building a nuclear plant and building renewable capacity, building new nuclear will result in greater emissions.

By: MieScatter

MieScatter — Fri, 20 Sep 2013 13:32:00 +0000

A pity. Keeping nuclear means turning off coal power stations earlier, and letting nuclear whither just means burning millions of tons more coal.