[Plantagenet]

Leading Republican Senator calls for building 100 new nukes in the US over the next 20 years build nukes now

If we are going to transition to electric cars, we need lots more electric power in the US.

[AAA]

I agree we NEED nuclear power NOW!!! Actually we needed this 20 years ago.

[Armageddon]

Leading Republican Senator calls for building 100 new nukes in the US over the next 20 years build nukes now If we are going to transition to electric cars, we need lots more electric power in the US.

What do you plan on burning in those reactors ?

[AAA]

What do you plan on burning in those reactors ?

Dollars

[Plantagenet]

What do you plan on burning in those reactors ?

Dollars

+1

ROFL


Actually, they'll be fueled with transgenic radio-active whales.

[Armageddon]

Isn't uranium becoming scarce ?

[Schmuto]

Isn't uranium becoming scarce ?

If it isn't it will be soon enough.

[TheAntiDoomer]

Isn't uranium becoming scarce ?

Nah.

https://isbenvsci.wikispaces.com/Resources

Uranium is Plentiful–There’s enough to last most of a century if we use U-235 (0.7%). When we develop Fast Neutron Reactors, we will convert the U-238 (99.3%) to plutonium which is also a nuclear fuel. This will elongate the amount of energy we can gain from using Nuclear power.

Not to even mention Thorium:

http://blogs.chron.com/sciguy/archives/2009/04/thorium.html

In the words of the immortal Soup Nazi.....NEXT!

[Maddog78]

Might be a short term shortage but I bet they can fire up that SK mine and increase supply pretty quickly if the price is right.

Uranium supply shortage could be looming
Analyst says China's uranium demand could tighten supply
By Tom Stundza -- Purchasing, 5/13/2009 9:54:00 AM
Salida Capital analysts in Toronto believe that a possible 35% increase in the number of nuclear power plants operating worldwide this decade could create a supply shortage in the supply of uranium yellowcake--especially if China decides to stockpile the metal to avert domestic shortages.

Global mine output of uranium is about 107 million lbs annually, says Salida Capital’s analysis, far less than demand of some 168 million lbs, with the shortfall coming from secondary supplies (primarily government inventories). “If we simplistically assume the average new reactor consumes as much fuel as those currently operating, the industry must source an additional 59 million lbs of uranium annually on an ongoing basis—and likely within the next decade,” Salida analysts propose. That would mean a 55% increase in mine output from current levels.

Salida Capital suggests the bulk of future uranium supply growth depends on three key regions of Kazakhstan, Canada (in Saskatchewan) and Australia.

[Armageddon]

It just doesn't make sense to depend on another non renewable resource.

[ian807]

Sure, why not? Make a bunch of complex expensive power plants with major waste disposal problems rather than thousands of relatively inexpensive solar panels, small hydroelectric dams, windmills, wave generators and perhaps a few ocean based stirling engine generators with no waste disposal problems.

Yes comrades, we must have centralized power! Centralization! It's the American way!

And of course, it requires a big capital-intensive facility that an oil company can buy and operate profitably, not like some sissy, ubiquitous, decentralized, local, small-scale power stuff.

Certainly no bias in that suggestion. No siree!

Ahem.

[AAA]

And of course, it requires a big capital-intensive facility that an oil company can buy and operate profitably, not like some sissy, ubiquitous, decentralized, local, small-scale power stuff.

You just lost any credibility you might have had with me. You obviously know nothing about the oil industry.

[timmac]

Build them, But please don't try and send your nuclear waste to Nevada, we don't want it, However we will accept your nuclear waste for a water pipe line from Lake Michigan.

[OutOfGas]

If my memory is correct (and it may not be) the last Nuclear plant started in the US was at Rockport Indiana.

Construction was stopped after massive cost over runs. This was when oil price was low.

If oil spikes again (it will ) we will not be able to afford the construction costs.

High grade Ur ore is in short supply. Unless we are willing to burn dirty coal (we will) utilities will not be able to provide electricity to the growing US population.

[Plantagenet]

Sure, why not? Make a bunch of complex expensive power plants with major waste disposal problems rather than thousands of relatively inexpensive solar panels, small hydroelectric dams, windmills, wave generators and perhaps a few ocean based stirling engine generators with no waste disposal problems.

Your assumption that the US has to build either nukes or renewable energy installations is silly. The US could and should build both nukes and alternative energy farms to replace our current use of oil and coal.

Any honest advocate of solar and wind energy has to admit that there are times when the sun doesn't shine (its called "night") and times when the wind isn't blowing (its called "weather"). Because of "night" and "weather" it isn't possible to build a power grid based solely on solar and wind power----backup capacity almost as large as the entire installed solar and wind energy base must be available to use when it is "night" and during times of windless "weather."

[eastbay]

Yes, Plantagenet, 'night' and 'weather' will definitely interfere with solar and wind power designs.....

And let's not forget that 'out of cheap uranium' might interfere with nuclear power designs as well.

http://www.reuters.com/article/GlobalMi ... DL20090311

Despite the recent decline, Grandey said the industry's mined output still lags consumption that has risen due to the resurgence of nuclear power as a non-greenhouse gas producing alternative to fossil fuel generation.

He said global mined output is 115 million pounds a year, compared with consumption of about 180 million pounds that he expects to grow at between 2 and 3 percent per year.

[ian807]

You just lost any credibility you might have had with me. You obviously know nothing about the oil industry.

Wow. Interesting cognitive leap there. Care to explain?

I'm pretty sure that oil companies will buy other power generating by equipment, and that they have the capital reserves to do so. I would, if I were them. They're not married to oil. They're married to money.

Oh, FYI, I work in the oil industry. Upstream. And you?

[pablonite]

They're not married to oil. They're married to money.

For sure, when the lines between multinational corporations and nationalization get blurred, the beast is large.

As for nukes, it is just hard to trust any entity with running a nuclear plant when we see the waste product being fired out of the barrel of a gun.