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.

Politics : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (4332)	1/19/2009 8:12:48 PM
From: Hawkmoon	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86356

My energy rates just went up 20%+ to pay for a Florida nuke plant that won't go on line for at least 7 years.... assuming it gets built at all. A rate increase mandated by the government. You should be grateful.. Because Progress plans on closing down 2 of it's coal fired plants when those nukes are up and running.. That should really make you feel warm and fuzzy about how you've helped to "save the planet": As recently announced, the company will retire the two oldest coal-fired units at the Crystal River Energy Complex in Citrus County after the new, advanced-design nuclear units are built in Levy County. Doing so will reduce the company's carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by more than 5 million tons per year, which is the equivalent of removing more than 830,000 vehicles from Florida's roads or meeting nearly 60 percent of the company's responsibility toward achieving Florida Governor Charlie Crist's 2025 emission-reduction target. progress-energy.com And btw, I would opposed the construction of the additional 2 Gigawatt nuke capacity there in Florida since I think that we should have a dedicated focus on Pebble Bed Reactors, especially in areas like Floria where contamination of the ground water from a catastrophic failure is not warranted. That would not really be an issue with PBR reactors which are, by design, meltdown "proof". popularmechanics.com Furthermore, PBR's are designed to be modular, with various parts built around the country and assembled on-site. This would drastically reduce both the price (basic logic), and the assembly time, if not commence a form of "mass production" assembly line process that is currently lacking in nuke design. The Chinese certainly seem to like the design concept: pebblebedreactor.blogspot.com This is in DISTINCT difference to the type of nuke that Progress is trying to build where you are. I would suggest natural gas generation for the interim and spend some money on PBR demonstrators and prototypes (which is what ALL Gen IV reactors truly are). Hawk