Killing two birds with one lump of uranium Monday, February 28, 2011 11:32 AM CST. http://www.dailytribune.net/articles/2011/02/28/news/monday04.txt By Lou Antonelli - Tribune Managing Editor On Sunday, I was watching "This Week with Chris Matthews", and he asked his guests "Tell Me Something I Don't Know" - a regular feature of his program. I was a bit surprised to find myself in agreement with Dan Rather, who said nuclear power for generating electricity is getting a new look, because it is non-polluting - as compared to coal, oil or natural gas - and safety procedures have improved immensely over the past few decades. You might be surprised to know that, according to some information I gleaned from the Nuclear Energy Institute in Washington, D.C., that in 2010, the 104 nuclear power plants operating in 31 states had a combined generation more than 800 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity. During our nasty recent cold snap, from mid-January through Feb. 2, the four reactors at the STP power station near Houston and the Comanche Peak installation operated at an average capacity of 100 percent. The two nuclear power stations provide 10.5 percent of the state's electricity Overall, nuclear power plants account for about 10 percent of America's installed electric generation capacity but, due to their efficiency and reliability, produce 20 percent of the country's total electricity supply. ADVERTISEMENT I also learned by doing a little research that in 2009, 13-14% of the world's electricity came from nuclear power. France generates 80 percent of its electricity using nuclear power, and according to a 2007 story broadcast on "60 Minutes", nuclear power gives France the cleanest air of any industrialized country, and the cheapest electricity in all of Europe. There hasn't been a new nuclear power plant construction permit issued in the United States since the accident at Three Mile Island in 1979. One of the last nuclear power plant units to come on line was at Texas's own Comanche Peak in 1993. Back in 1986, when I was a newcomer to Texas, I got a job at a weekly paper in Midlothian, in Ellis County south of Dallas. On a clear day, you could see a rise on the horizon some 60 miles away. That was Comanche Peak, I was told. Now, I can't see Comanche Peak from my back door now, but I can see the Monticello power plant nearby, and I think: What a great place for a nuclear power plant. With global warming getting worse, even committed environmentalists are rethinking nuclear power as the lesser among various evils. Unless you want to go back to a pre-industrial society and do away with electricity, nuclear energy looks better than ever as a source of power. Because of my sideline of writing science fiction, I probably know a little more on the subject than a lot of people in these parts. There's nothing scary or mysterious about nuclear power, if you know what you're doing. It's just uses another source of fuel. Like all energy sources, it has its waste. France reprocesses its nuclear waste to reduce its mass and make even more energy. We already have a large power generating facility in Titus County; the practical tax benefits of adding a nuclear power plant or two would be astounding. In 2009, Monticello facilities paid more than $18 million in tax contributions to surrounding counties and school districts. Building more nuclear power plants would lessen if not eliminate our addiction to cheap foreign oil, and ease the pollution contributing to global warming. That's a two-fer I can support. Now, I can't see Comanche Peak from my back door now, but I can see the Monticello power plant nearby, and I think: What a great place for a nuclear power plant. ??? eah... inlife we have to choices, either one or others. So, for industrial orientation, we need so sufficient energy, competitive and clean. But in other side we need the natural invironment as it is. So, how to make it balancing and keep maintaining the life such more harmony and healthyness.

News

Print this story  |  Email this story  |  [+] Text Size [-]

Killing two birds with one lump of uranium Monday, February 28, 2011 11:32 AM CST. http://www.dailytribune.net/articles/2011/02/28/news/monday04.txt By Lou Antonelli - Tribune Managing Editor On Sunday, I was watching "This Week with Chris Matthews", and he asked his guests "Tell Me Something I Don't Know" - a regular feature of his program. I was a bit surprised to find myself in agreement with Dan Rather, who said nuclear power for generating electricity is getting a new look, because it is non-polluting - as compared to coal, oil or natural gas - and safety procedures have improved immensely over the past few decades. You might be surprised to know that, according to some information I gleaned from the Nuclear Energy Institute in Washington, D.C., that in 2010, the 104 nuclear power plants operating in 31 states had a combined generation more than 800 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity. During our nasty recent cold snap, from mid-January through Feb. 2, the four reactors at the STP power station near Houston and the Comanche Peak installation operated at an average capacity of 100 percent. The two nuclear power stations provide 10.5 percent of the state's electricity Overall, nuclear power plants account for about 10 percent of America's installed electric generation capacity but, due to their efficiency and reliability, produce 20 percent of the country's total electricity supply. ADVERTISEMENT I also learned by doing a little research that in 2009, 13-14% of the world's electricity came from nuclear power. France generates 80 percent of its electricity using nuclear power, and according to a 2007 story broadcast on "60 Minutes", nuclear power gives France the cleanest air of any industrialized country, and the cheapest electricity in all of Europe. There hasn't been a new nuclear power plant construction permit issued in the United States since the accident at Three Mile Island in 1979. One of the last nuclear power plant units to come on line was at Texas's own Comanche Peak in 1993. Back in 1986, when I was a newcomer to Texas, I got a job at a weekly paper in Midlothian, in Ellis County south of Dallas. On a clear day, you could see a rise on the horizon some 60 miles away. That was Comanche Peak, I was told. Now, I can't see Comanche Peak from my back door now, but I can see the Monticello power plant nearby, and I think: What a great place for a nuclear power plant. With global warming getting worse, even committed environmentalists are rethinking nuclear power as the lesser among various evils. Unless you want to go back to a pre-industrial society and do away with electricity, nuclear energy looks better than ever as a source of power. Because of my sideline of writing science fiction, I probably know a little more on the subject than a lot of people in these parts. There's nothing scary or mysterious about nuclear power, if you know what you're doing. It's just uses another source of fuel. Like all energy sources, it has its waste. France reprocesses its nuclear waste to reduce its mass and make even more energy. We already have a large power generating facility in Titus County; the practical tax benefits of adding a nuclear power plant or two would be astounding. In 2009, Monticello facilities paid more than $18 million in tax contributions to surrounding counties and school districts. Building more nuclear power plants would lessen if not eliminate our addiction to cheap foreign oil, and ease the pollution contributing to global warming. That's a two-fer I can support.

Return to Previous Page   Comment Blog - Note: All Comments Subject To Approval Glad wrote on Feb 28, 2011 4:27 PM: " I am glad to see forward thinking, I totally agree with you. I think a nuclear power plant around here would greatly improve our independence of coal. I also believe the new plant would tremendously improve our local and even regional economy. I keep thinking the in the "Great Depression" the president of the time Mr. FDR had a very brilliant and reasonable solution. His solution was to improve and build infrastructure, to help create jobs, and the overall confidence and moral of America. I think this would be a viable solution to our current economic status. I strongly disagreed with the "Stimulus" package of the last presidential administration in that handing a check to everyone. So in short, I agree with you in the need of a nuclear facility, not only for environmental reasons, but for economic as well. " TxT wrote on Feb 28, 2011 1:07 PM: