Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tommaso who wrote (93831)	4/26/2008 4:38:29 PM
From: Elroy Jetson	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 110194

The nuclear industry remains a costly boondoggle which survives only with the assistance of various government subsidies, perhaps more generous than those for ethanol. Chevron has discovered and produced sources of uranium ore but decided against further participation in that industry due to liability and economics - the two being interlinked. It was Chevron's analysis that nuclear energy as designed was not economic when the costs of waste disposal were included. Firms such as Westinghouse which claim nuclear is a low-cost fuel do not include disposal costs in their calculations - and were protected by liability waivers, which in Chevron's estimation could later be removed as easily as they were put into place. As a consequence participating further downstream in the business than supplying uranium ore would be accompanied by a massive and unavoidable tail of liability. If the nuclear energy business were actually profitable, this would not be a problem as the liability would have been exceeded by the profits. Because nuclear energy as designed is extremely uneconomic, the tail of liability would threaten the company's existence. As a result, participation in the industry was unacceptable and denied by the Board. .