Public Utilities Commission Chairman John Hutson is trying to persuade Mayor Alan Autry and the Fresno City Council to build a nuclear power plant next to the city's wastewater treatment plant. Hutson says nuclear energy is safe and it would help meet the city's energy needs.
The idea may not be as far-fetched as some believe. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. is looking at nuclear power plants to augment its energy supplies. A story in today's San Francisco Chrionicle points out that the idea has a big hurdle: "California law forbids building more nuclear plants within the state until the United States has a permanent site for storing radioactive waste." PG&E, however, is considering investing in nukes outside the state as a way to curb greenhouse gases, according to the Chron.
Here's the story.
PG&E also has several other alternative energy proposals, including solar power plants that would feature focused mirrors to heat water, generate steam and run electrical turbines, according to the Chron.
At a time of rapidly increasing demand on our energy supplies, we need to be looking at all avenues of supplying a U.S. population that doesn't want to cut back on energy use.
I appreciate the blog. Nuclear power is not the total answer but only a part of the solution. Conservation is a big part of the solution as is solar, wind and other technologies.
To gain energy independance and meet energy demands of the future, nuclear power plant options must be explored. The rest of the world is building nuclear power plants and will continue to do so whether we do or not.
Maybe we can achive energy independence incrementally, with the various options. I would hope we start with solar and see how far we can take that technology to achieve our goals.
Do we have any wind in Fresno? I can't even fly a kite with my Son around here.
Maybe in the end we will not need the nuclear option.
nuclear power plant options HAVE been explored! the debate is over. you lost. i think what you mean is....now that a generation or two has passed, you'd like to REexplore the "option",and no doubt will bring to bear, all the usual public relations razzle dazzle. but it will be to no avail. like the temperance flat dam option, the court costs alone will make it cost prohibitive.....i promise.
I'm not really paranoid about the dangers of nuclear power - I realize that accidents have been rare over the years, with Chernobyl and Three Mile Island being the exceptions rather than the rule. But the potential harm from a nuclear accident, however unlikely, is definitely a factor to consider. Safety protocols tend to be only as effective as the people charged with implementing them.
I found the last line in the original post a bit troubling - that we need to look at "all avenues" because the American people don't want to cut back on energy use. Are we really that selfish and short-sighted? We did see significant reductions in Californian's energy use during the Enron-fueled energy crisis a few years ago. And people seem more receptive to conservation efforts like replacing regular light bulbs with compact flourescents. Shouldn't we be encouraging that trend, rather than dismissing it?
Whatever the safety factor is, nuclear power is expensive. What if the same amount of money was invested in solar energy and conservation? Would it be possible to achieve the same, or even better results?
Who is the "you" in Mr. Swifts comments above? There is a whole new generation of people out there who would like to explore this as an option. It seems our friends in France have been using it for years without issue, why can't we just explore the idea. To blow Nuclear off the table before the debate is even started is short-sighted.
as much as I enjoyed the metaphor, {blow nuclear off the table},You cant " start" a debate that has been going on for forty years, unless you mean a fresh campaign of propaganda about "clean energy"...the next Chernobyl will probably BE Chernobyl as the concrete pour covering the PERMANENT toxic site, has developed leaks and rainwater is pouring in and its expected to give way any day now.
After reading the negative comment about not even talking about nuclear power, I am reminded of a quote by Stephen Hopkins, delegate to the 1st Congress and signer of the Declaration of Independance from Rhode Island, "I have never found a subject so dangerous it couldn't be talked about."
I wonder how many people have actually researched what effects the Chernobyl accident had on people and the environment. I'm doing a research project over there next summer. The wildlife bounced back faster than anyone anticipated and is currently thriving. The only effect from the accident on people was and increase in Thyroid cancer, which is easily treatable and has a recovery of about 95%. Interestingly Mr. Swift, the most damage Chernobyl has done to the people is psychological. People in the region has worse overall health and it's only because everyone ignorantly assumes that because of what happened, they're going to die earlier and have worse lives. When people get hysterical about it and start asserting things that they haven't studied, they're doing more damage than a reactor meltdown would.
The people of Fresno pay too much for power. Putting another power plant in, nuclear or not, is not going to solve that problem. "A group of Fresno Businessmen" is how the article in this morning's Fresno Bee started. "A group of Fresno Businessmen are going to foot the bill themselfs for building this thing? I don't think so. Who's going to pay for it? We are people. Who's going to pay for it if there's an accident? We are people. Nuclear power is not a natural resorce and there is the waste to contend with. Who wants that run-off wanter in our water table? Why is it that I don't see more solar pannels? Wouldn't these business men make more effective use of thier efforts to find ways to make solar pannels more affordable? That's what's going to save the tax payers and PG&E customers save money. Nuclar power isn't going to save anyting. I've seen a few apartment complexs with them, Camelot (on Peach I belive) has solar pannels on their car ports.