Total cost of nuclear

[flacaltenn]

What a dopey air-head 'Speaker' is.

if its so ok then you should have the spent fuel under your pillow you retarded fat ****. i think that anyone who thinks that nuclear is safe and "the way to go" should live with it. right in their house. walk you talk dude, but i'll tell you what, I refuse to have a bunch of high school drop out shit heads to put me and my family in danger. who gives a **** if the nuclear industry falls. OH NO A BUNCH OF RICH BASTARDS LOST THEIR JOBS THAT MURDER MILLIONS. its incredible the sheer power of a bunch of idiots. I will never underestimate a whole lot of stupid people again.

And there it is.. I wasted 10 minutes of my lunch hour on this pitiful case... Doesn't want to discuss nuclear or debate energy use. He wants to just tag up the forum with his art...

 

[flacaltenn]

Bob:

Your stuff is sooo devoid of understanding, so lacking in logic, reason, and science and SO DEMENTED and incoherent --- that I actually thanked you for repeating it.. I can think of no better example in my thousands of posts on science orientated forums of the sheer emotional desire to whine about stuff, mangle facts, and intentionally act stupidly...


You're STILL repeating stuff about Hanford and other Weapons Programs mismanagement of nuclear waste as tho Americans won't know the diff between GOVT malfeasance on a BOMB program and a commercial nuclear plant. But here's the bigger piece of evidence you left behind...

What caused the remaining large increase? Ask the opponents of nuclear power and they will recite a succession of horror stories, many of them true, about mistakes, inefficiency, sloppiness, and ineptitude. They will create the impression that people who build nuclear plants are a bunch of bungling incompetents. The only thing they won't explain is how these same "bungling incompetents" managed to build nuclear power plants so efficiently, so rapidly, and so inexpensively in the early 1970s.

What a huge mystery eh? And what a COMPLIMENT to the nuclear industry saying that we "...managed to build nuclear plants so efficiently, so rapidly and so inexpensively in the early 1970s" Thanks -- my side of the argument appreciates that compliment from your side.

Can't think of a single reason why nuclear construction costs SOARED in the mid -- 70s? Not a single reason can ya? Why is that?

It's because you didn't read the WHOLE ARTICLE and you're scientifically, politically, and historically ignorant and wish to remain that way.

HERE'S a hint for you --- from the same cut and paste and CENSOR job that you did above.

While there is little difference in materials cost, we see from Fig. 1 that the difference in labor costs between M.E. and B.E. plants is spectacular. The comparison between these is broken down in Table 1. We see that about half of the labor costs are for professionals. It is in the area of professional labor, such as design, construction, and quality control engineers, that the difference between B.E. and M.E. projects is greatest. It is also for professional labor that the escalation has been largest — in 1978 it represented only 38% of total labor costs versus 52% in 1987. However, essentially all labor costs are about twice as high for M.E. as for B.E. projects. The reasons for these labor cost problems will be discussed later in this chapter in the section on "Regulatory Turbulence."

Turns out to be a VERY THOROUGH and thoughtful analysis primarily for the PRO-Nuclear side.. But you STOPPED reading (or just saw the $$$$ and cut them out).

See if you can complete the story on your own.. What public agencies came along in the mid - 70's with the political PURPOSE of increasing the construction cost of nuclear power?

Keep it up Bob.. You're a valuable member of the eco-system here. Much the same contribution as a dung beetle...

 

[Skull Pilot]

What a dopey air-head 'Speaker' is.

if its so ok then you should have the spent fuel under your pillow you retarded fat ****. i think that anyone who thinks that nuclear is safe and "the way to go" should live with it. right in their house. walk you talk dude, but i'll tell you what, I refuse to have a bunch of high school drop out shit heads to put me and my family in danger. who gives a **** if the nuclear industry falls. OH NO A BUNCH OF RICH BASTARDS LOST THEIR JOBS THAT MURDER MILLIONS. its incredible the sheer power of a bunch of idiots. I will never underestimate a whole lot of stupid people again.

Very few people have died as a result of nuclear power and more than 98% of nuclear fuel can be recycled only here in the USA we have made it illegal to do so.

There Is No Such Thing as Nuclear Waste - WSJ.com

 

[bobgnote]

Are you quoting yourself, again, Fatass? I chose those articles because they did a thorough analysis, from all sides of the issue.

Nuclear power still is too expensive. You are too queer to explain, how "regulatory turbulence" may have issued in the 1970s, since nuclear plants were all screwing up, and no new constructions issued, since then, until recently, and they all screwed up, going way over budget.

You ignore any poison, you are too stupid to understand AGW, so pretending to be able to manage nukes makes you feel smart. But you are a dumbshit.

You are a stupid, ranting, shouting punk, who can't read a graph, so **** off, when you shout out some concept, which you will not explain, completely.

A complete explanation is you cannot justify nuclear energy projects, without some of hem being directly related to bomb-making, and others being pure scams, with federal subsidies, for scamming private profiteers, who pollute. **** off, moron. Read another story.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The cost or nuclear electricity is less than that of fossil fuel generated electricity.

Nuclear Power Economics | Nuclear Energy Costs

Low generation costs can offset the higher construction costs associated with nuclear.

Newer smaller reactors are even less expensive and do not need massive installations. Many could be plugged into existing fossil fuel generation plants thus making nuclear less expensive than any other power source.

 

[bobgnote]

Scum Punk, your queer porn website is completely oblivious, to all cost-overruns, at all nuclear facilities, whatever kind those are, since Fermi tried to melt Stagg Field, 1942.

Without federal subsidies, your lying website wouldn't even exist. Scammers trying to lie about the cost structure of nuclear energy would just give up.

What happens is cost-overruns and unforeseen technical fuckups take every last nuclear project into decommissioning or into the red. You are a total asshole, into queer porn.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Scum Punk, your queer porn website is completely oblivious, to all cost-overruns, at all nuclear facilities, whatever kind those are, since Fermi tried to melt Stagg Field, 1942.

Without federal subsidies, your lying website wouldn't even exist. Scammers trying to lie about the cost structure of nuclear energy would just give up.

What happens is cost-overruns and unforeseen technical fuckups take every last nuclear project into decommissioning or into the red. You are a total asshole, into queer porn.

One who must resort to constant name calling is displaying his inferior command of the English language as well as his lack of intellect.

 

[Katzndogz]

We just permanently closed the nuclear plant at San Onofre. Germany is phasing out its nuclear power plants after the tragedy in Japan.

Nuclear power is on its way out.

 

[flacaltenn]

We just permanently closed the nuclear plant at San Onofre. Germany is phasing out its nuclear power plants after the tragedy in Japan.

Nuclear power is on its way out.

You Californians are making history.. And as dark and dingy as your public spaces are getting now --- the future just isn't any brighter in Cali...

 

[Unkotare]

Nuclear power is on its way out.

Wrong again

 

[Skull Pilot]

We just permanently closed the nuclear plant at San Onofre. Germany is phasing out its nuclear power plants after the tragedy in Japan.

Nuclear power is on its way out.

With no reliable replacement.

Not a very smart move. The US Navy has been nuclear powered for decades now and the safety record is excellent.

There is no reason to be concerned with the safety of nuclear power. In fact we should ramping up research and production of more efficient self limiting reactors.

The demand for electricity is going nowhere but up. Windmills and solar panels will not fill the void.

 

[bobgnote]

We just permanently closed the nuclear plant at San Onofre. Germany is phasing out its nuclear power plants after the tragedy in Japan.

Nuclear power is on its way out.

With no reliable replacement.

Not a very smart move. The US Navy has been nuclear powered for decades now and the safety record is excellent.

There is no reason to be concerned with the safety of nuclear power. In fact we should ramping up research and production of more efficient self limiting reactors.

The demand for electricity is going nowhere but up. Windmills and solar panels will not fill the void.

Scum Punk logic keeps ignoring green tech, of any kind, since no petro-nuker geeks will go for proper land use, to grow hemp, switchgrass, or other CO2-neutral biomass media, which we have to grow, eventually, either to minimize CO2 emissions or to re-green, since nukes or not, emissions of GHGs will force an extinction event, which is ongoing, already. But Scum Punks can't do accounting for budgets or climate change.

Scum Punk logic wants us to go out of the global warming frying pan, into the Navy's line of fire. You can operate an aircraft carrier or a submarine, with reactors, but you cannot get a civilian or military application on land to go under-budget. No land use nuclear facilities are ever under budget, Punk!

The Navy is a write-off because the US wants dominance, on the oceans, which requires long-range vessels, which pack a nuclear weapons arsenal. But your queer logic about cheap nuclear power is just more, "C'mon, get happy!!!" Shove something glowing way up your own butt, Punk.