Drill baby drill... Ill bet they retire that line...

Taichiliberal said:
Actually, it seems a link once placed in quotes sometimes will not connect. Going to the original post where the link was given should give you the proper connection. That way, you can't BS or lie your way out of being wrong.

http://climateprogress.org/2009/07/15/nuclear-power-plant-cost-bombshell-ontario/
Click to expand...

From your link:

Canada, Finland, Turkey
Click to expand...

Libbie, what you fail to understand is that costs of nuke plants is largely influenced by the political climate and union labor. When I lived in New York my electrical utility was Niagara Mohawk. NY is a liberal state, highly regulated, and unionized. My electric rates went up every year and Ni-Mo's excuse was "because we have nuclear power".

When I moved to North Carolina my utility company is Duke Energy, and my per kilowatt power cost went down 40%. It is a relatively conservative state and "right-to-work", so unions don't control the labor force. Duke's reason for the low power costs?- "because we have nuclear power".
 
Jarod said:
Actually, funny you should say that. I did walk today... I live exactly .37 miles from the office. I usually do drive becuse I have to go places during the day.

I never said all offshore drilling should cease immideatly. Never not even once.
Click to expand...
So, you're saying you're a NIMBY? It's okay to destroy the coastline of some magical land of far-far awayville, but not to carefully drill nearby because one company who said they were "greener" than all other oil companies wasn't careful enough?
 
Damocles said:
So, you're saying you're a NIMBY? It's okay to destroy the coastline of some magical land of far-far awayville, but not to carefully drill nearby because one company who said they were "greener" than all other oil companies wasn't careful enough?
Click to expand...

No, thats not what I am saying.
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Actually, it seems a link once placed in quotes sometimes will not connect. Going to the original post where the link was given should give you the proper connection. That way, you can't BS or lie your way out of being wrong.

http://climateprogress.org/2009/07/1...shell-ontario/
Click to expand...

Southern Man said:
From your link:

Canada, Finland, Turkey
Click to expand...

Libbie, what you fail to understand is that costs of nuke plants is largely influenced by the political climate and union labor. When I lived in New York my electrical utility was Niagara Mohawk. NY is a liberal state, highly regulated, and unionized. My electric rates went up every year and Ni-Mo's excuse was "because we have nuclear power".

When I moved to North Carolina my utility company is Duke Energy, and my per kilowatt power cost went down 40%. It is a relatively conservative state and "right-to-work", so unions don't control the labor force. Duke's reason for the low power costs?- "because we have nuclear power".
Click to expand...

Hmmm, that doesn't really jibe with the following:

http://greenhellblog.com/2009/06/17...ty-price-hike-500-million-for-north-carolina/

http://www.redorbit.com/news/busine...ercent_jump_in_nc_electric_bills_possible_if/

COLA differences alone between NC and NY is significant....with NY being on the high end of graph....unions do NOT control all aspects of a states COLA, nor are they the root cause of all financial upheavals (i.e., Wall St.).

And if what you say is true, how does that lowering compare to the cost of construction, re-fueling, waste removal and containment? Remember, these costs are always passed along to the customers:

http://www.neis.org/literature/Brochures/npfacts.htm

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/01/nuclear_power.html
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/01/nuclear_power_part2.html

The earlier link I gave regarding Canada is an apt indicator of the least talked about costs of nuke power.
 
Last edited:
Taichiliberal said:
Hmmm, that doesn't really jibe with the following:

http://greenhellblog.com/2009/06/17...ty-price-hike-500-million-for-north-carolina/

http://www.redorbit.com/news/busine...ercent_jump_in_nc_electric_bills_possible_if/

COLA differences alone between NC and NY is significant....with NY being on the high end of graph....unions do NOT control all aspects of a states COLA, nor are they the root cause of all financial upheavals (i.e., Wall St.).

And if what you say is true, how does that lowering compare to the cost of construction, re-fueling, waste removal and containment? Remember, these costs are always passed along to the customers:

http://www.neis.org/literature/Brochures/npfacts.htm

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/01/nuclear_power.html
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/01/nuclear_power_part2.html

The earlier link I gave regarding Canada is an apt indicator of the least talked about costs of nuke power.
Click to expand...

Libbie, do you read what you link to. From your first link:

“In addition to the significant costs associated with existing state and federal environmental and other regulatory requirements… we are facing expected greenhouse gas reduction requirements in the near future.”

“By 2030, the electric utility industry will need to make a total infrastructure investment of $1.5 to $2.0 trillion.”
Click to expand...

Do you know where that money is required? To reduce CO2 emissions at Duke's coal fired power plants. Your link supports my argument that more nukes are needed, since they are carbon free. :palm:
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Hmmm, that doesn't really jibe with the following:

http://greenhellblog.com/2009/06/17/...orth-carolina/

http://www.redorbit.com/news/busines...s_possible_if/

COLA differences alone between NC and NY is significant....with NY being on the high end of graph....unions do NOT control all aspects of a states COLA, nor are they the root cause of all financial upheavals (i.e., Wall St.).

And if what you say is true, how does that lowering compare to the cost of construction, re-fueling, waste removal and containment? Remember, these costs are always passed along to the customers:

http://www.neis.org/literature/Brochures/npfacts.htm

http://www.americanprogress.org/issu...ear_power.html
http://www.americanprogress.org/issu...wer_part2.html

The earlier link I gave regarding Canada is an apt indicator of the least talked about costs of nuke power.
Click to expand...

Libbie, do you read what you link to. From your first link:


Quote:
“In addition to the significant costs associated with existing state and federal environmental and other regulatory requirements… we are facing expected greenhouse gas reduction requirements in the near future.”

“By 2030, the electric utility industry will need to make a total infrastructure investment of $1.5 to $2.0 trillion.”
Click to expand...


Do you know where that money is required? To reduce CO2 emissions at Duke's coal fired power plants. Your link supports my argument that more nukes are needed, since they are carbon free. :palm:
Click to expand...

First you stated that it was UNIONS that was cause for the high costs of nuke plants construction and operations. Once I produced FACTS that disproved your claim, you NOW claim that ESTIMATED cost estimates to meet future greenhouse gas emission standards is the cause.

Think for a minute, Southy....my links are not only referring to FUTURE costs, but CURRENT costs as well. That includes refueling, construction, decomissioning, waste containment, transport and storage. Also, the link you referred to mentions the greenhouse emission standards as PART of the high cost problem....once again, YOU take your supposition and conjecture as fact, and that is just not the case. My ENTIRE link DOES NOT support your myopic opinion, supposition or conjecture here.

"North Carolina consumers need to take note at what is happening right now in Florida, where Progress Energy already has applied for a 31 percent rate increase, driven in large part by escalating nuclear power costs. ... The average residential electricity bill in North Carolina is currently $100 per month, with larger homes generally using more electricity than smaller ones. If the proposed coal and nuclear plants are built, electricity rates will increase dramatically. Sufficient information is available to conclude that Progress Energy rates would rise by at least half, or an average of $50 each month, for each residence. This assumes that the current cost estimates for the new nuclear plants will not escalate as they have done over the last four years even while new units remain on the drawing board. If that happens, home electricity bills could easily double."


According to the report: "Upcoming carbon regulation will also drive up the price of coal-fired power, giving even more impetus to efficiency programs and new renewable energy." The report outlines four things Duke Energy and Progress Energy can do to avoid the risks associated with building the new nuclear and coal-fired power plants:


Stop impeding progress toward real energy efficiency. Through proven programs growing at a modest pace, efficiency can be increased at least 1% per year through 2023. Twenty other U.S. utilities and municipalities have already achieved at least this much.
Bring on renewable energy as required by the 2007 Energy Bill, Senate Bill 3. At least 7.5% of electricity from new renewable sources is well within reach, especially as prices for solar equipment continue declining and as North Carolina joins other mid-Atlantic states in developing its large wind energy potential.
Make modest increases in load control programs to soften demand peaks.
Add cogeneration (combined heat and power), a proven resource that is largely untapped in North Carolina.


REMEMBER, Although nuke plants are carbon free, their solid waste is far more deadly, and cost of construction, re-fueling, waste removal and containment costs are always passed along to the customers.

Get it together Southy....you're changing your story with the frequency of a cheap ham radio to avoid admitting I'm right on any point. :palm:
 
Last edited:
Jarod said:
Have you seen the mess that is just 17 miles from the Louisiana Coast?


You wont hear Palin saying Drill baby drill again any time soon!
Click to expand...

do not bet on it

deep sea drilling requires safeties that were not used

shallower drilling has already been done and requires similar but different safeties

looks like capping this one will be a bigger problem than originally thought due to the difference in chemistry at those pressures

oh well - we know that the oil companies do not care
 
Moron

DonQuixote said:
do not bet on it

deep sea drilling requires safeties that were not used

shallower drilling has already been done and requires similar but different safeties

looks like capping this one will be a bigger problem than originally thought due to the difference in chemistry at those pressures

oh well - we know that the oil companies do not care
Click to expand...

You don't care dumbass
 
Drill Baby Drill???

Jarod said:
Have you seen the mess that is just 17 miles from the Louisiana Coast?


You wont hear Palin saying Drill baby drill again any time soon!
Click to expand...

air-spill.jpg

BREAKING: Large Air Spill At Wind Farm. No Threats Reported

Drill, Baby, Drill Quotes

"That was not a Senate Republican phrase. I think there was a candidate that used that."
-- Sen. Kyl, denying the GOP endorsed that slogan

"I don’t know about the slogan. That was three years ago and we had a lot of opposition to it anyway."
-- Sen.Pat Roberts, lying whore,

"The chant is 'drill, baby, drill'."
-- Palin in the VP debate with Biden,

"You’re right, pal. Drill, baby, drill. Drill offshore and drill now."
-- Geezer McCain, October 27, 2008 on CNN,

"Let’s reduce our dependency on foreign sources of oil. In other words: Drill, baby, drill!"
-- Michae; Tom Steele, at 2008's NaziCon

"Drill, baby, drill" is now, "Hush, baby, hush."
-- Mike Soraghan

5410jm.jpg
 
Southern Man said:
:lol: Libbie I must have you so frazzled that you're talking to yourself. Try again. :palm:
Click to expand...

And as the post shows, once again Southy bluffs and blusters rather than deal with the facts and logic that proves him wrong. Watch as he won't debate what is presented in the rebuttal, but just regurgitate his supposition and conjecture along with his myopic reviews and out-of-context quotes.

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showpost.php?p=648115&postcount=106

And the beat goes on.
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
And as the post shows, once again Southy bluffs and blusters rather than deal with the facts and logic that proves him wrong. Watch as he won't debate what is presented in the rebuttal, but just regurgitate his supposition and conjecture along with his myopic reviews and out-of-context quotes.

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/sho...&postcount=106

And the beat goes on.
Click to expand...


Southern Man said:
Libbie, when you can out a logical paragraph together get back to me.
Click to expand...

Southy is SO pathetic...on a medium as anonymous as this one, Southy cannot admit he's in error or that he's wrong on ANY level. Subsequently, when Southy realizes that he's looking foolish trying to defend his inability to logically defend his position in light of contrary facts, he's bluffs, blusters, lies and dodges....pity Southy doesn't realize how painfully transparent and obvious his ploys are in light of the chronology of the posts.

Oh well, I've reduced him to a self aggrandizing babbling clown...I'll leave him here to his lies and false accusations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top