<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Gang of 20 energy bill contains ‘most significant taxpayer-backed boost to nuclear power ever’]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by amazingdrx http://www.grist.org/article/bipartisan-nuke-subsidies/ Mon, 15 Sep 2008 07:09:57 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/bipartisan-nuke-subsidies/1 New design first

A whole new design for nuclear power has to be developed, tested and proven before anymore money is spent on nuclear buildout.

Present designs are fataly flawed and far too expensive.  Syop the boondoggle now.  let the scietists and engineers work on experimental reactors, then settle on one to mass produce.  

Stop the nuclear industry lobbyist thievery!

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

]]> New design first

A whole new design for nuclear power has to be developed, tested and proven before anymore money is spent on nuclear buildout.

Present designs are fataly flawed and far too expensive.  Syop the boondoggle now.  let the scietists and engineers work on experimental reactors, then settle on one to mass produce.  

Stop the nuclear industry lobbyist thievery!

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

]]> Comment #2 by GRLCowan http://www.grist.org/article/bipartisan-nuke-subsidies/ Mon, 15 Sep 2008 07:29:18 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/bipartisan-nuke-subsidies/2 Pure gravy

A 2003 CBO report estimated a 50 percent failure rate on loan guarantees for new nuclear, and as Mariotte points out, "that was back in the day when CBO was thinking the guarantees would cover about 50% of the cost of a new reactor -- now the guarantees have to cover 80% of the cost

CBO's failure rate dates from when government guaranteed none of the cost. Sabotaging nuclear plant construction projects was then, for it, pure gravy.

The more it has to cover, the easier for it to see the public interest in having the projects not get derailed.

--- G.R.L. Cowan, H2 energy fan 'til ~1996

]]> Pure gravy

A 2003 CBO report estimated a 50 percent failure rate on loan guarantees for new nuclear, and as Mariotte points out, "that was back in the day when CBO was thinking the guarantees would cover about 50% of the cost of a new reactor -- now the guarantees have to cover 80% of the cost

CBO's failure rate dates from when government guaranteed none of the cost. Sabotaging nuclear plant construction projects was then, for it, pure gravy.

The more it has to cover, the easier for it to see the public interest in having the projects not get derailed.

--- G.R.L. Cowan, H2 energy fan 'til ~1996

]]>