- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 4/18/22 at 9:37 pm to WhereisAtlanta
:rotflmao: I’ve taught second career for 15 years. The Vogtle Plant is over budget and behind schedule every year I’ve taught.
When is it now going into commercial operation?
I’m all for it but jfc, an engineer starting on this project at 22 yo out of college would be in their mid 40s now. Effin ridiculous.
I know of at least one Georgia Power president fired. There was more than one.
Does anyone on this board even know the schedule for completion?
How about overall cost?
At least Georgia Power is completing Vogtle, unlike SCE&G’s Santee Cooper. They were on the same track. Four units. Two to be done? We’ll see.
Posted on 4/19/22 at 12:36 am to AUstar
One reason is the way it was marketed. The word “Nuclear” is scary to a lot of people. In 50’s people were afraid of a Nuclear war with USSR. Instead of calling it a “Nuclear Power Plant” it should have been a Renewable Atom-powered Plant or Renewable Fusion-powered plant.
Another reason is coal industry was against it. The use of coal had fallen almost every year until 1965. If they had not found a betterway to extract coal there would be a thousand nuclear power plants in the US.
Missouri gets 11% of its energy from nuclear and around 70%(highest in the nation) from coal. Coal is down over 10% in 10 years because of biodiesel and wind. Missouri produces about 10% of the nations biodiesel(soybeans and pig shite) which is only behind Iowa and Texas.
Another reason is coal industry was against it. The use of coal had fallen almost every year until 1965. If they had not found a betterway to extract coal there would be a thousand nuclear power plants in the US.
Missouri gets 11% of its energy from nuclear and around 70%(highest in the nation) from coal. Coal is down over 10% in 10 years because of biodiesel and wind. Missouri produces about 10% of the nations biodiesel(soybeans and pig shite) which is only behind Iowa and Texas.
This post was edited on 4/19/22 at 12:38 am
Posted on 4/19/22 at 1:28 am to SantaFe
quote:
All the safety features/regs drive the price up of building one. You should have seen the insane amount of concrete and rebar that went into the foundation of the River Bend plant by St. Francisville.
Insurance for a Nuclear Power Plant is crazy. Hydro is free, oil is about $.08 a barrel, and Nuclear Plant is $450 million. $450 million is the first of 3 piers that they have to pay
quote:
Although not required by the Price-Anderson Act, NRC regulationsii require licensees to maintain a minimum of $1.06 billion in onsite property insurance at each reactor site.
quote:
Currently, owners of nuclear power plants pay an annual premium for $450 million in private insurance for offsite liability coverage for each reactor site (not per reactor). This primary, or first tier, insurance is supplemented by a second tier. In the event a nuclear accident causes damages in excess of $450 million, each licensee would be assessed a prorated share of the excess, up to $131.056 million per reactor.
LINK
Posted on 4/19/22 at 8:11 am to Von
quote:
Geothermal is another solution the climate whackos won't look at.
Isn't geothermal pretty popular in the SW states?
Wonder how expensive it is to install one of those systems.
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News