Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,401 Year: 3,658/9,624 Month: 529/974 Week: 142/276 Day: 16/23 Hour: 2/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is nuclear power safe??
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 2 of 57 (609258)
03-17-2011 7:29 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by fearandloathing
03-17-2011 6:30 PM


of course not
Of course not, nuclear power is not safe, but then no form of energy production is really safe, there are advantages and risks to every scenario.
But we need to be having a discussion about energy provision that I simply don't seem happening. IMHO the first step that is needed is to re-regulate energy production and generation as a Limited Regulated Monopoly and limit the capitalistic aspects while emphasizing the socialistic aspects.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by fearandloathing, posted 03-17-2011 6:30 PM fearandloathing has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Coyote, posted 03-17-2011 7:35 PM jar has replied
 Message 11 by jar, posted 03-17-2011 9:52 PM jar has not replied
 Message 40 by Caleb, posted 05-11-2011 5:27 PM jar has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


(1)
Message 4 of 57 (609260)
03-17-2011 7:43 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Coyote
03-17-2011 7:35 PM


Re: of course not
Coyote writes:
IMHO the first step that is needed is to re-regulate energy production and generation as a Limited Regulated Monopoly and limit the capitalistic aspects while emphasizing the socialistic aspects.
A top-down command economy, eh? Get rid of all competition?
Have a five-year plan too?
(We all know how well all those things work.)
I imagine you can point to where I advocated any of those things or do you just enjoy misrepresenting folk?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Coyote, posted 03-17-2011 7:35 PM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 11 of 57 (609272)
03-17-2011 9:52 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by jar
03-17-2011 7:29 PM


Next step
Okay, step two.
Once we have re-regulated energy production and distribution and re-instituted the Regulated Limited Monopoly Utility system, the next step is to look at the current US inventory of Nuclear Power Stations and prioritize the risk and threat from each.
Then we decide which should be closed down, which need to be upgraded and which are as safe as we can make them.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by jar, posted 03-17-2011 7:29 PM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Coyote, posted 03-17-2011 10:22 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 13 of 57 (609310)
03-18-2011 10:20 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by Coyote
03-17-2011 10:22 PM


Re: Next step
I don't think I have said that we need to build any "post haste".
No single design is "safe" or "best". That will depend on the needs of the population to be served and the site itself.
One "nuclear" course to consider might be decentralization, returning to the concept of small modular units.
But first we need to make our current inventory of ALL, not just nuclear, power generating sources as safe as possible while we transition the whole field from the current relatively unregulated capitalistic mess back to the Highly Regulated Limited Monopoly.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Coyote, posted 03-17-2011 10:22 PM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 17 of 57 (609317)
03-18-2011 11:06 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by fearandloathing
03-18-2011 10:50 AM


Re: mini nuclear power plants
fearandloathing writes:
I guess one of the real questions should be...Do we trust the NRC? What could be done to make it better?
Right now, I would say that the answer is a resounding "NO!"
In the US we have been trying valiantly to make reasonable regulation impossible. We have split control among multiple organizations, under funded and under staffed all of them, limited their authority. We decided that we did not want government overseeing and interfering with making a profit.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by fearandloathing, posted 03-18-2011 10:50 AM fearandloathing has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by fearandloathing, posted 03-18-2011 11:22 AM jar has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


(1)
Message 19 of 57 (609328)
03-18-2011 11:43 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by fearandloathing
03-18-2011 11:22 AM


Re: mini nuclear power plants
We have a very long and tough job in the US to return to what I would consider reasonable regulation.
I think an almost essential first step would be to ban all corporate political contributions and severely limit corporate lobbying.
But in the case of the Energy Sector, I favor returning to regulated limited utility monopolies where a single entity is granted exclusive access to a given geographic area. Consumer rates would be set by the regulating entity and there would be requirements for minimal level of service to EVERY home and business in the area. Discounts based on increased usage would be eliminated. The profit for the Utility would also be regulated as a percentage of return on investment.
At the Federal Level, for example the NRC, we need to fully fund a large enough staff that is well paid and with staffing levels so that every site gets at least a thorough semi-annual inspection. The NRC also needs sufficient authority to actually enforce the regulations with the threat of jail, asset confiscation and termination and reassignment of the monopoly hanging over corporate officers.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by fearandloathing, posted 03-18-2011 11:22 AM fearandloathing has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by fearandloathing, posted 03-18-2011 12:05 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 23 of 57 (609334)
03-18-2011 12:17 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by fearandloathing
03-18-2011 12:05 PM


Re: mini nuclear power plants
That is actually a great example.
In the past, back when the Bell System was the sole supplier of telephone service and one of the limited regulated utility monopolies, and the same was true for Duke Power, their profits were directly tied to their investment in infrastructure. If they came out and changed out those poles it simply would have increased their profitability.
Today, maintenance and infrastructure have been moved to the other side of the ledger, and replacing those poles is a direct cost and a decrease in profitability.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by fearandloathing, posted 03-18-2011 12:05 PM fearandloathing has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024