German utilities closing fossil fuel power plants - can't compete with renewables

[RollingThunder]

Many of America's AGW denier cultists have been brainwashed by the fossil fuel industry's propaganda into the delusional belief that renewable energy sources like solar and wind energy can't compete economically with fossil fuel power plants, but some recent news from Germany belies that particular idiocy.

3.1 GW Of Fossil Fuel Power Plants To Be Shut Down In Germany — No Longer Competitive
CleanTechnica
(excerpts)
RWE has announced in their latest report on their first six months results (press release in German) that they plan to take 3.1 GW of fossil fuel generating capacity off the market. The reason they give for that is that wholesale electricity prices are way down in Germany as a consequence of more renewable in the mix. They would be losing money if they needed to sell at these low prices. They don’t, since most of their business is fulfilling contracts from the past couple of years, which still have higher prices, but that effect will be gone soon.

We learn from that: Prices have gone down from the mid term average of around EUR 55 a MWh to less than EUR 40. They estimate the minimum price necessary for gas generation as EUR 70, for coal as EUR 60, for lignite as EUR 45, and even for nuclear power after the plants have already paid back their investment as EUR 40, including a tax on nuclear fuel. With prices below EUR 40 on the wholesale markets, operators like RWE may want to mothball their nuclear capacity even before they are required to do so by the 2011 law on the nuclear phase-out. For one, he notes that this is great news. If RWE can’t even run fossil fuel power plants that have paid back their investment already at these low wholesale market prices, it follows that it doesn’t make any sense to start building new fossil fuel capacity now. Any new plant would need to earn back its capital cost, which is of course impossible.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Many of America's AGW denier cultists have been brainwashed by the fossil fuel industry's propaganda into the delusional belief that renewable energy sources like solar and wind energy can't compete economically with fossil fuel power plants, but some recent news from Germany belies that particular idiocy.

3.1 GW Of Fossil Fuel Power Plants To Be Shut Down In Germany — No Longer Competitive
CleanTechnica
(excerpts)
RWE has announced in their latest report on their first six months results (press release in German) that they plan to take 3.1 GW of fossil fuel generating capacity off the market. The reason they give for that is that wholesale electricity prices are way down in Germany as a consequence of more renewable in the mix. They would be losing money if they needed to sell at these low prices. They don’t, since most of their business is fulfilling contracts from the past couple of years, which still have higher prices, but that effect will be gone soon.

We learn from that: Prices have gone down from the mid term average of around EUR 55 a MWh to less than EUR 40. They estimate the minimum price necessary for gas generation as EUR 70, for coal as EUR 60, for lignite as EUR 45, and even for nuclear power after the plants have already paid back their investment as EUR 40, including a tax on nuclear fuel. With prices below EUR 40 on the wholesale markets, operators like RWE may want to mothball their nuclear capacity even before they are required to do so by the 2011 law on the nuclear phase-out. For one, he notes that this is great news. If RWE can’t even run fossil fuel power plants that have paid back their investment already at these low wholesale market prices, it follows that it doesn’t make any sense to start building new fossil fuel capacity now. Any new plant would need to earn back its capital cost, which is of course impossible.

The fossil fuel special interests here in the USA are losing their utility customers to renewables. Granted it is still small but the utilities can see the cost benefits in solar and wind power. Put that up against the ever increasing costs of fossil fuels and it becomes a no brainer for them to take that option instead. The math beats propaganda every time.

 

[Two Thumbs]

well good for them


and good luck not needing them, especially the nuke plants

 

[RollingThunder]

well good for them

and good luck not needing them, especially the nuke plants

Actually, the Germans are probably very wise to discontinue using the old style nuclear plants that they have been using. Possibly someday some new safe, cheap and non-polluting form of nuclear power plant will be developed that might aid in the very necessary process of eliminating CO2 emitting power sources, but until then, current nuclear power generation is very dangerous and problematical, as the Fukushima disaster demonstrates.

Fukushima: a Looming Nuclear Disaster
Guardian Express
by James Turnage
August 18, 2013
(excerpts)
Fallout researcher Christina Consolo told RT that the removal of 1,300 fuel rods from the disabled Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant, could result in a disaster. The situation poses a monumental challenge to TEPCO, the Tokyo company contracted to do the clean-up. There are 400 tons of the rods stored in a pool inside of reactor number 4. They must be removed manually from the top of the reactor which has an environment filled with high radioactivity. Consolo says that the slightest mishap with a single rod could cause an above ground meltdown with disastrous results and no way to control it. The end result could be millions of deaths. But she points out that maintaining the status quo could have the same results. “Although fuel rod removal happens on a daily basis at the 430+ nuclear sites around the world, it is a very delicate procedure even under the best of circumstances. What makes fuel removal at Fukushima so dangerous and complex is that it will be attempted on a fuel pool whose integrity has been severely compromised. However, it must be attempted as Reactor 4 has the most significant problems structurally, and this pool is on the top floor of the building,” said Consolo.

Other problems have increased the difficulty of the process. The racks which hold the rods were damaged in the explosion. There is no way to know how damaged the walls of the pool may be, or to what extent the rods may be corroded until they are removed. In addition, the cranes formerly used to lift the rods were destroyed when the plant exploded after the tsunami. Each rod must be removed individually by a team of humans, who will be working in an extremely dangerous environment. Mishandling of a single rod could cause a chain reaction between all 1,300, creating a nuclear accident that could not be stopped. Reactor number 4 is sinking. There have been attempts to remove the ground water inside the structure which in itself is radioactive and is contaminating the ocean and the shoreline. When Consolo was asked what the most serious complication could be, she said: “The most serious complication would be anything that leads to a nuclear chain reaction. And as outlined above, there are many different ways this could occur. In a fuel pool containing damaged rods and racks, it could potentially start up on its own at anytime. TEPCO has been incredibly lucky that this hasn’t happened so far.”

 

[asterism]

I wonder how that's going to work when the government subsidies end.

However, this is encouraging news.

 

[Derideo_Te]

well good for them

and good luck not needing them, especially the nuke plants

Actually, the Germans are probably very wise to discontinue using the old style nuclear plants that they have been using. Possibly someday some new safe, cheap and non-polluting form of nuclear power plant will be developed that might aid in the very necessary process of eliminating CO2 emitting power sources, but until then, current nuclear power generation is very dangerous and problematical, as the Fukushima disaster demonstrates.

Fukushima: a Looming Nuclear Disaster
Guardian Express
by James Turnage
August 18, 2013
(excerpts)
Fallout researcher Christina Consolo told RT that the removal of 1,300 fuel rods from the disabled Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant, could result in a disaster. The situation poses a monumental challenge to TEPCO, the Tokyo company contracted to do the clean-up. There are 400 tons of the rods stored in a pool inside of reactor number 4. They must be removed manually from the top of the reactor which has an environment filled with high radioactivity. Consolo says that the slightest mishap with a single rod could cause an above ground meltdown with disastrous results and no way to control it. The end result could be millions of deaths. But she points out that maintaining the status quo could have the same results. “Although fuel rod removal happens on a daily basis at the 430+ nuclear sites around the world, it is a very delicate procedure even under the best of circumstances. What makes fuel removal at Fukushima so dangerous and complex is that it will be attempted on a fuel pool whose integrity has been severely compromised. However, it must be attempted as Reactor 4 has the most significant problems structurally, and this pool is on the top floor of the building,” said Consolo.

Other problems have increased the difficulty of the process. The racks which hold the rods were damaged in the explosion. There is no way to know how damaged the walls of the pool may be, or to what extent the rods may be corroded until they are removed. In addition, the cranes formerly used to lift the rods were destroyed when the plant exploded after the tsunami. Each rod must be removed individually by a team of humans, who will be working in an extremely dangerous environment. Mishandling of a single rod could cause a chain reaction between all 1,300, creating a nuclear accident that could not be stopped. Reactor number 4 is sinking. There have been attempts to remove the ground water inside the structure which in itself is radioactive and is contaminating the ocean and the shoreline. When Consolo was asked what the most serious complication could be, she said: “The most serious complication would be anything that leads to a nuclear chain reaction. And as outlined above, there are many different ways this could occur. In a fuel pool containing damaged rods and racks, it could potentially start up on its own at anytime. TEPCO has been incredibly lucky that this hasn’t happened so far.”

What no one wants to talk about is that there is an identical reactor sitting on the NJ shore that was right in the path of Hurricane Sandy. They keep on renewing the license even though it is well past it's "Use by" date.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I read in another thread that Germany is building 20 new coal fired plants. Something about the fact that in the winter the sun doesn't shine enough to power their green grid.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Germany to Add Most Coal-Fired Plants in Two Decades, IWR Says - Bloomberg

Ya green is great.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Another story about coal in Germany.

Why Is Germany's Greenest City Building a Coal-Fired Power Plant? | InsideClimate News

 

[skookerasbil]

OK.....we see a lot of makey-uppey stuff on here promulgated by the warmist radicals but this may well be the most hysterical ever.

Germany is all in on coal in 2013!!!



Germany to Add Most Coal-Fired Plants in Two Decades, IWR Says

By Stefan Nicola - Feb 27, 2013 4:55 AM ET

Germany will this year start up more coal-fired power stations than at any time in the past 20 years as the country advances a plan to exit nuclear energy by 2022.

New coal plants with about 5,300 megawatts of capacity will start generating power this year, the Muenster-based IWR renewable energy institute said in an e-mailed statement today, citing data from the German regulator. About 1,000 megawatts of coal-fired capacity are expected to come offline, it said.


Germany to Add Most Coal-Fired Plants in Two Decades, IWR Says - Bloomberg




Exit nukes.......enter coal!!!



Yup.....Germany's green plan is in the shitter!!! LOL....even Salon magazine says so!!!

Germany?s clean energy plan backfired - Salon.com



For the k00ks its >>>>>>>

 

[Abraham3]

For those of you that think this story has been made up, here is a link to the actual press release by RWE:

Pressemitteilungen - RWE AG

Here is the text:

Essen, 14. August 2013, RWE AG
English
RWE bestätigt Prognose für 2013


Gazprom-Entscheidung stützt Ergebnis im ersten Halbjahr
Kraftwerke mit 3100 MW Kapazität gehen aus dem Markt

Das anhaltend niedrige Preisniveau an den Strommärkten belastet die gesamte Energiewirtschaft und damit auch RWE. Im ersten Halbjahr 2013 konnte RWE diese Belastungen allerdings noch durch den positiven Ausgang des Schiedsverfahren mit Gazprom ausgleichen. Bei einem leicht erhöhten Umsatz von 28,5 Mrd. Euro lag das EBITDA bei 5,5 Mrd. Euro (+9%) und das betriebliche Ergebnis bei 4,1 Mrd. Euro (+12%). Dennoch sank das Nettoergebnis um 38% auf rund 1 Mrd. Euro. Hauptursache ist die marktbedingte Wertberichtigung des niederländischen Erzeugungsportfolios um rund 800 Mio. Euro. Das nachhaltige Nettoergebnis betrug rund 2 Mrd. Euro. Dieser Anstieg um 19% ist dem Sondereffekt aus dem positiven Gazprom-Schiedsspruch zuzurechnen.
Kraftwerke werden aus dem Markt genommen
Angesichts des ungebrochenen Solarbooms rechnet sich branchen- und europaweit der Betrieb vieler Kraftwerke nicht mehr. So hat der Unternehmensbereich Konventionelle Stromerzeugung im ersten Halbjahr 2013 fast zwei Drittel seines operativen Ergebnisses eingebüßt. Die stark verringerten Kraftwerksmargen spielen hier eine zentrale Rolle. Noch profitiert RWE davon, dass die Stromproduktion größtenteils am Terminmarkt auf bis zu drei Jahre zu damals noch höheren Preisen im Voraus verkauft wurde. Doch dieser Effekt wird von Jahr zu Jahr schwächer. Nach eingehender Analyse hat der Konzern entschieden, Kraftwerke in Deutschland und den Niederlanden mit einer Gesamtleistung von 3100 Megawatt (MW) aus dem Markt zu nehmen. Weitere Kraftwerke sind auf dem Prüfstand; hier werden sämtliche Optionen zur Verbesserung der Wirtschaftlichkeit ausgelotet.
Stromerzeugung - Stromabsatz - Gasabsatz
Im ersten Halbjahr 2013 hat RWE 111,3 Mrd. Kilowattstunden (kWh) Strom produziert. Das sind 1,2 Mrd. kWh bzw. 1% weniger als im gleichen Zeitraum des Vorjahres. Der Stromabsatz an externe Kunden sank um 4% auf 135,9 Mrd. kWh. Einen starken Rückgang wies das Segment Industrie- und Geschäftskunden auf, nachdem RWE in Deutschland seit Januar 2013 keine Stromauktionen für ausgewählte Industriekunden mehr tätigt. Unter den Weiterverteilern in Deutschland konnte der Konzern neue Kunden gewinnen. RWE npower musste wettbewerbsbedingte Absatzverluste bei Industrie- und Geschäftskunden hinnehmen. Dies trifft auch auf Essent in den Niederlanden zu, die aber im Gegenzug vom Ausbau des belgischen Privatkundengeschäfts profitierte.
Die kühle Witterung hat den Gasabsatz um 17% auf 194,2 Mrd. kWh steigen lassen. Das zeigt sich auf allen europäischen Märkten, lediglich in Tschechien wurde der positive Effekt durch den wachsenden Wettbewerb aufgezehrt. Deutlich ausbauen konnte RWE auch den Gasabsatz an Weiterverteiler, vor allem in Deutschland.
Investitionen und Cash Flow
Nach dem Abschluss bedeutender Projekte im Kraftwerkserneuerungsprogramm sinkt das Investitionsvolumen im Vorjahresvergleich um 16% auf 1,9 Mrd. Euro. Das Programm ist auf der Zielgeraden, Anfang August hat das Gaskraftwerk im türkischen Denizli den kommerziellen Betrieb aufgenommen. Derzeit sind noch zwei Steinkohledoppelblöcke in Hamm und Eemshaven im Bau. Der Cash Flow aus laufender Geschäftstätigkeit hat sich mit 1,4 Mrd. Euro nur leicht verbessert. Nach Abzug der Sachinvestitionen und immateriellen Vermögenswerte ergibt sich ein Free Cash Flow von - 418 Mio. Euro, ein immer noch negativer, aber besserer Wert als im Vorjahreszeitraum (-740 Mio. Euro).
Ausblick
Da der Anstieg beim EBITDA und beim betrieblichen Ergebnis auf einem Sondereffekt aus dem positiven Schiedsspruch zu einem Gasbezugsvertrag mit Gazprom beruht, darf er nicht auf das Gesamtjahr hochgerechnet werden. Der Konzern hält aber an der Prognose für 2013 fest, wie sie im März dieses Jahres gegeben wurde: RWE erwartet ein betriebliches Ergebnis in der Größenordnung von 5,9 Mrd. Euro und ein nachhaltiges Nettoergebnis in der Größenordnung von 2,4 Mrd. Euro.
Zukunftsbezogene Aussagen
Diese Pressemitteilung enthält Aussagen, die sich auf die zukünftige Entwicklung des
RWE-Konzerns und seiner Gesellschaften sowie wirtschaftliche und politische Entwicklungen beziehen. Diese Aussagen stellen Einschätzungen dar, die wir auf Basis aller uns zum jetzigen Zeitpunkt zur Verfügung stehenden Informationen getroffen haben. Sollten die zugrunde gelegten Annahmen nicht eintreffen oder weitere Risiken eintreten, so können die tatsächlichen Ergebnisse von den zurzeit erwarteten Ergebnissen abweichen. Eine Gewähr können wir für diese Aussagen daher nicht übernehmen.
Für Rückfragen
Volker Heck
Leiter Konzernkommunikation
T +49 201 12 15120

Annett Urbaczka
Leiterin Konzernpresse
T +49 201 12 17441

If you don't speak German, copy the whole thing to your clipboard and take it to www.translate.google.com

 

[skookerasbil]

Renewables are in this shitter in Europe anywhere you look. But don't take my word for it.......see what USA Today said recently >>>>>>

Renewable energy losing its shine in Europe

The reason is simple. To the AGW radicals, "costs" do not matter. But to the regular folks and especially to the governments in European countries, the costs do matter.

Spending reductions on clean energy in Germany........because costs are sucking!!!

Merkel Losing Allies in $700 Billion Shift to Renewables - Businessweek


The people aren't liking the extra $300 a year on their electric bill.......only the AGW OCD's think that is a political winner!!!!

 

[Two Thumbs]

well good for them

and good luck not needing them, especially the nuke plants

Actually, the Germans are probably very wise to discontinue using the old style nuclear plants that they have been using. Possibly someday some new safe, cheap and non-polluting form of nuclear power plant will be developed that might aid in the very necessary process of eliminating CO2 emitting power sources, but until then, current nuclear power generation is very dangerous and problematical, as the Fukushima disaster demonstrates.

Fukushima: a Looming Nuclear Disaster
Guardian Express
by James Turnage
August 18, 2013
(excerpts)
Fallout researcher Christina Consolo told RT that the removal of 1,300 fuel rods from the disabled Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant, could result in a disaster. The situation poses a monumental challenge to TEPCO, the Tokyo company contracted to do the clean-up. There are 400 tons of the rods stored in a pool inside of reactor number 4. They must be removed manually from the top of the reactor which has an environment filled with high radioactivity. Consolo says that the slightest mishap with a single rod could cause an above ground meltdown with disastrous results and no way to control it. The end result could be millions of deaths. But she points out that maintaining the status quo could have the same results. “Although fuel rod removal happens on a daily basis at the 430+ nuclear sites around the world, it is a very delicate procedure even under the best of circumstances. What makes fuel removal at Fukushima so dangerous and complex is that it will be attempted on a fuel pool whose integrity has been severely compromised. However, it must be attempted as Reactor 4 has the most significant problems structurally, and this pool is on the top floor of the building,” said Consolo.

Other problems have increased the difficulty of the process. The racks which hold the rods were damaged in the explosion. There is no way to know how damaged the walls of the pool may be, or to what extent the rods may be corroded until they are removed. In addition, the cranes formerly used to lift the rods were destroyed when the plant exploded after the tsunami. Each rod must be removed individually by a team of humans, who will be working in an extremely dangerous environment. Mishandling of a single rod could cause a chain reaction between all 1,300, creating a nuclear accident that could not be stopped. Reactor number 4 is sinking. There have been attempts to remove the ground water inside the structure which in itself is radioactive and is contaminating the ocean and the shoreline. When Consolo was asked what the most serious complication could be, she said: “The most serious complication would be anything that leads to a nuclear chain reaction. And as outlined above, there are many different ways this could occur. In a fuel pool containing damaged rods and racks, it could potentially start up on its own at anytime. TEPCO has been incredibly lucky that this hasn’t happened so far.”

what a load

stance against nuclear power based on fear - AVG Yahoo! Search Results

the hate of nuke power is based on fear not facts

only buffoons and the uninformed think otherwise.

seriously, they can't replace 31 Gw just cuz

 

[Two Thumbs]

well good for them

and good luck not needing them, especially the nuke plants

Actually, the Germans are probably very wise to discontinue using the old style nuclear plants that they have been using. Possibly someday some new safe, cheap and non-polluting form of nuclear power plant will be developed that might aid in the very necessary process of eliminating CO2 emitting power sources, but until then, current nuclear power generation is very dangerous and problematical, as the Fukushima disaster demonstrates.

Fukushima: a Looming Nuclear Disaster
Guardian Express
by James Turnage
August 18, 2013
(excerpts)
Fallout researcher Christina Consolo told RT that the removal of 1,300 fuel rods from the disabled Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant, could result in a disaster. The situation poses a monumental challenge to TEPCO, the Tokyo company contracted to do the clean-up. There are 400 tons of the rods stored in a pool inside of reactor number 4. They must be removed manually from the top of the reactor which has an environment filled with high radioactivity. Consolo says that the slightest mishap with a single rod could cause an above ground meltdown with disastrous results and no way to control it. The end result could be millions of deaths. But she points out that maintaining the status quo could have the same results. “Although fuel rod removal happens on a daily basis at the 430+ nuclear sites around the world, it is a very delicate procedure even under the best of circumstances. What makes fuel removal at Fukushima so dangerous and complex is that it will be attempted on a fuel pool whose integrity has been severely compromised. However, it must be attempted as Reactor 4 has the most significant problems structurally, and this pool is on the top floor of the building,” said Consolo.

Other problems have increased the difficulty of the process. The racks which hold the rods were damaged in the explosion. There is no way to know how damaged the walls of the pool may be, or to what extent the rods may be corroded until they are removed. In addition, the cranes formerly used to lift the rods were destroyed when the plant exploded after the tsunami. Each rod must be removed individually by a team of humans, who will be working in an extremely dangerous environment. Mishandling of a single rod could cause a chain reaction between all 1,300, creating a nuclear accident that could not be stopped. Reactor number 4 is sinking. There have been attempts to remove the ground water inside the structure which in itself is radioactive and is contaminating the ocean and the shoreline. When Consolo was asked what the most serious complication could be, she said: “The most serious complication would be anything that leads to a nuclear chain reaction. And as outlined above, there are many different ways this could occur. In a fuel pool containing damaged rods and racks, it could potentially start up on its own at anytime. TEPCO has been incredibly lucky that this hasn’t happened so far.”

What no one wants to talk about is that there is an identical reactor sitting on the NJ shore that was right in the path of Hurricane Sandy. They keep on renewing the license even though it is well past it's "Use by" date.

You know why no one talks about it?

b/c nothing happened

If they did talk about it, liberals and fools would be faced with undeniable facts that they are WRONG again.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Man some people here reaaaaaaaally hate change! I can't see how this isn't a good thing!

Considering Germany is the most successful state in the EU how can we bash the success of the things they're doing?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Man some people here reaaaaaaaally hate change! I can't see how this isn't a good thing!

Considering Germany is the most successful state in the EU how can we bash the success of the things they're doing?

The article is a LIE. They are NOT getting rid of fossil fueled plants. They are getting rid of Nuclear plants out of fear and replacing them with COAL fired plants.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Man some people here reaaaaaaaally hate change! I can't see how this isn't a good thing!

Considering Germany is the most successful state in the EU how can we bash the success of the things they're doing?

so we should build more coal fired plants?

The region of PA I live in would friggin LOVE that

 

[Old Rocks]

Actually, the Germans are probably very wise to discontinue using the old style nuclear plants that they have been using. Possibly someday some new safe, cheap and non-polluting form of nuclear power plant will be developed that might aid in the very necessary process of eliminating CO2 emitting power sources, but until then, current nuclear power generation is very dangerous and problematical, as the Fukushima disaster demonstrates.

Fukushima: a Looming Nuclear Disaster
Guardian Express
by James Turnage
August 18, 2013
(excerpts)
Fallout researcher Christina Consolo told RT that the removal of 1,300 fuel rods from the disabled Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant, could result in a disaster. The situation poses a monumental challenge to TEPCO, the Tokyo company contracted to do the clean-up. There are 400 tons of the rods stored in a pool inside of reactor number 4. They must be removed manually from the top of the reactor which has an environment filled with high radioactivity. Consolo says that the slightest mishap with a single rod could cause an above ground meltdown with disastrous results and no way to control it. The end result could be millions of deaths. But she points out that maintaining the status quo could have the same results. “Although fuel rod removal happens on a daily basis at the 430+ nuclear sites around the world, it is a very delicate procedure even under the best of circumstances. What makes fuel removal at Fukushima so dangerous and complex is that it will be attempted on a fuel pool whose integrity has been severely compromised. However, it must be attempted as Reactor 4 has the most significant problems structurally, and this pool is on the top floor of the building,” said Consolo.

Other problems have increased the difficulty of the process. The racks which hold the rods were damaged in the explosion. There is no way to know how damaged the walls of the pool may be, or to what extent the rods may be corroded until they are removed. In addition, the cranes formerly used to lift the rods were destroyed when the plant exploded after the tsunami. Each rod must be removed individually by a team of humans, who will be working in an extremely dangerous environment. Mishandling of a single rod could cause a chain reaction between all 1,300, creating a nuclear accident that could not be stopped. Reactor number 4 is sinking. There have been attempts to remove the ground water inside the structure which in itself is radioactive and is contaminating the ocean and the shoreline. When Consolo was asked what the most serious complication could be, she said: “The most serious complication would be anything that leads to a nuclear chain reaction. And as outlined above, there are many different ways this could occur. In a fuel pool containing damaged rods and racks, it could potentially start up on its own at anytime. TEPCO has been incredibly lucky that this hasn’t happened so far.”

What no one wants to talk about is that there is an identical reactor sitting on the NJ shore that was right in the path of Hurricane Sandy. They keep on renewing the license even though it is well past it's "Use by" date.

You know why no one talks about it?

b/c nothing happened

If they did talk about it, liberals and fools would be faced with undeniable facts that they are WRONG again.

You dumb ass. If the pool goes critical, quite literally, millions of people will be in danger of dying. Not only in Japan, but there will be fallout here on the West Coast. This is an extroidinery situation, one frought with danger for everyone on this planet.

But people like you would have said that nothing like this was possible prior to this situation. Not only that, we have cooling pools here in the US that have three times the number of rods in them that they were designed for. A New Madrid type quake could very well test our ability to contain a nuclear accident of this very type.

 

[Two Thumbs]

What no one wants to talk about is that there is an identical reactor sitting on the NJ shore that was right in the path of Hurricane Sandy. They keep on renewing the license even though it is well past it's "Use by" date.

You know why no one talks about it?

b/c nothing happened

If they did talk about it, liberals and fools would be faced with undeniable facts that they are WRONG again.

You dumb ass. If the pool goes critical, quite literally, millions of people will be in danger of dying. Not only in Japan, but there will be fallout here on the West Coast. This is an extroidinery situation, one frought with danger for everyone on this planet.

But people like you would have said that nothing like this was possible prior to this situation. Not only that, we have cooling pools here in the US that have three times the number of rods in them that they were designed for. A New Madrid type quake could very well test our ability to contain a nuclear accident of this very type.

SNIFFFFF AHHHH

I love the smell of ignorance in the evening.

Tell me; How many nuclear accidents have occurred in the US?


hint; if you get too one finger, you're already wrong




but

FEAR is your only ally!!!!

 

[whitehall]

It's not about "renewables". That's the left wing spin on the issue. There isn't much in the way of oil exploration in Germany and nobody in their right mind would suggest that Germany runs on windmills and acres of solar panels. It's all about nuclear energy.