1. I just cannot understand why these people just don’t get it. They preach about needing massive amounts of clean, safe and affordable energy……and then totally dis the ONE source that can actually achieve this!!

    “In the face of climate change, we need real solutions now”…….yeah, and the “real” solution is Nuclear Power!!

    I can only assume these same people believe Pete Rose deserves to be in the HOF.

    1. @Bonds 25

      Though we argree about nuclear energy, we apparently disagree about Pete Rose’s accomplishments versus his gambling habit.

      He earned his place in the HOF by hustling and hitting; his gambling was a personal failure that did not artificially enhance his performance.

    2. Many people in general have a difficult time admitting they’re wrong, let alone just taking the time to question their beliefs.

  2. Betting on baseball is a *permanent ban* from the HOF. Game over. His acquired stats (which are overrated, but that’s not the point) during his playing career are null and void at this point. Rose was quite aware of these rules while he was betting on games. Rose never even eclipsed a 1.000 OPS during any season of his career. Barry Bonds did it 15 times…..including a 1.045 OPS during his final 2007 season (which was 3rd highest in MLB) Hell, his career OPS is 1.051.

    Bonds not getting elected is the real travesty……his stats are in a whole other galaxy compared to Rose. 8 gold gloves for Bonds, 1 for Rose. 7 MVP’s for Bonds (should be 8) and 1 for Rose. Even hustle……514 stolen bases for Bonds…..198 for Rose. 762 Home runs for Bonds….160 for Rose (lol). And Rose played in almost 600 more games than Bonds.

    1. @Bonds 25

      We agree about Bonds. Fantastic player.

      I’m not much of a “rule follower,” especially when the rule is perhaps artificially imposed.

  3. As a long time resident of the Upper Keys, I like the American crocodile
    am a beneficiary of Turkey point 3 and 4. We have among the lowest
    power costs onthe east coast. I am also a strong supporter of nuclear
    power in general.

    But I am at best ambivalent about Turkey Point 6 and 7. FPL
    is estimating the cost of two AP1000’s at between 12.8 and 18.7 billion,
    and has already started rolling in these future costs into current bills.
    The cost of FPL power to the local cooperative has gone from 6 cents to 7.5 cents.
    And thats only the start. If recent history is any guide, we will end up
    at the high end of the range or above.

    At these prices as a ratepayer, I dont want to see 6 and 7 built.

    1. @Jack Devanney

      What is the cost of electricity sold to local cooperatives from gas fired generating plants? How quickly would that change if US gas prices approached those of the world market?

      Do you believe that efforts from activists add substantial costs? Do you believe that efforts from supporters might help lower total costs?

    2. Any suggestions how Southern Florida can acquire this needed clean, safe, reliable energy without rates going up?

      1. Inevitably rates will go up. If dirty coal is to be phased out (as it should), cleaner generation capacity will need to take its place. Gas is a good option, but we should not expect cheap gas to last forever, especially at the rate we’re using it now. Investing in clear nuclear energy now will build a facility that can produce vast quantities of reliable and clean energy for 60 years or more. Nuclear energy is a great option for building a generation capacity that will have a steady cost long into the future.

      2. Rod,

        Dont know what the delivered cost of gas is in South Fl,
        but at the lower end of FPL’s range, we are looking at an Overnight
        cost of 15 cents/kWh and at the top end 24 cents. Quite
        confident that gas will be much cheaper altho it may take
        an extension of the pipeline network. I know people will say
        cheap gas is about to run out. I’ve spent most of my life
        underestimating the power of techology when it comes
        to fossile fuel extraction. It will be a long, long time before electricity
        from gas gets up in the 20 cent range.

        Bonds 25.

        Move from high pressure, low temperature nuclear
        to low pressure, high temperature nuclear. but
        this wont happen in the US without strong top-down direction.

        1. @Jack Devanney

          There were times in both of the past two winters when electricity from natural gas fired power plants in New England exceeded 20 cents per kilowatt hour by a rather large margin.

          There are times in the heat of the summer in Texas, much closer to adequate reservoirs of gas, when the price of electricity from gas has exceeded 40 cents per kilowatt hour for several days running – if the producer could get any deliveries at all.

          I’m in favor of ThorCon’s ideas. I wish development had started in earnest decades ago. At this time, however, I believe that there is a place for additional AP1000 reactors until such time as there are more available options. They have their issues, but they have a design certification.

    3. You’ll open foundries. We in Central New York will close ’em. Industry here will be gambling and the occasional Dunkin’ Donuts.

      The local casinos are expanding. I couldn’t believe the hoopla when a new Dunkin’ Donuts opened in a nearby town.

      It’s bizarre.

      1. I grew up in Central New York. It has been in economic free fall since the 1960’s. NOTHING gets built there without a tax incentive, loan or grant. I had never seen a “Help Wanted” sign until I moved to Florida in the 1980’s.

        NY has not had a successful economic development program since the Erie Canal.

        1. I lived in Western NY for the first 31 years off my life……I now live in Eastern Washington. Every year that goes by (7.5) my distain for NY grows. Only thing I miss (besides friends, family and going to Bills games) are the beautiful colors of the trees in autumn.

    4. I am surprised at the range of costs. Hopefully, the kinks in the supply chain will have been worked out by then as well as design/operation issues (too late for Vogtle and Summer).

      If they really think the costs are that uncertain, that is a good argument for pausing and reconsidering.

      1. Costs are going to have a wide range for a variety of reasons.

        Uncertain future financing costs (i.e. interest rates and carrying charges) for the debt or bonds depending on how the bulk of the facilities will be financed.

        Then there is the hard to quantify NRC and state regulatory costs. What will the NRC impose on the new facilities due to the local site condItions or construction issues that develop.

        Also a high degree of uncertainty in estimating the legal costs associated with challenges from SACE and other anti-nuclear gropus who will come after FPL directly and through the NRC by any legal means they can.

        Then add in the uncertain costs for upgrades to the local grid where the regulatory and technical requirements are shifting on a yearly basis.

        So it doesn’t surprise me to see that wide of a range for a cost estimate for two large power plants.

  4. Yes!

    This is what we need. Two more of the same plants that are already under construction, at the time when Westinghouse will have all of the lessons learned from the first of these plants coming online (in China). Not something different.

    As far as the NRC costs are concerned, most of them are with respect to the licensing delays. Opposition will have little power once the COL is approved.

Comments are closed.

Recent Comments from our Readers

  1. Avatar
  2. Avatar
  3. Avatar
  4. Avatar
  5. Avatar

Similar Posts