Re: 136 More Nuclear Reactors are Under Construction
- Hello Bashir, Bill Stange here,
As I often do, I daydream about what the future should look like.
I am very interested in "Solar Thermal Generation."
What if electrical generating plants were to be built on or near
land fills or sewage treatment plants, both tapping and producing
methane for generation AND using Solar Thermal Generation as
supplemental on the same site. Texas has the benefit of such a large
land mass and months of solar extremes to tap into. Continued use of
coal = continued mercury dispersion of air and especially water,
Nuclear waste will just be handed to our children to handle- no
foresight. As a country with growing energy problems we only seem to
use Nineteenth/Twentieth century energy sources?
From what I have read along with "Peak Oil" comes "Peak Nat. Gas"
situations that I am sure are fueling the current rush to "fast
track" coal and nuclear in Texas and the Country.
Above is a link to what is already generated by the U.S. state by
state with coal technology and I notice that California has none!
I thank you in advance for any info. And thoughts on this subject
you may have.
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Bashir Syed" <bsyed@...> wrote:
> NUCLEAR is not really GREEN ENERGY (It's a misnomer):
> The back cover of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists Jan/Feb. 2007
has a very informative AD about " 3rd Annual Platts Nuclear Energy"
Opportunities for Growth and Investment in North America, Feb. 8-9,
2007, to be held at Omni Shoreham Hotel, Washington, DC.
> Here is what the Secretary of Energy, Samuel Bodman, said during
the 2nd Platts Conference on February 2006.
> "Right now, 130 new reactors are under construction or
consideration around the world/. The explanation for this is simple -
- the world needs more energy, and less carbon."
> The fact of the matter is that the emission of no carbon from
nuclear reactors is used as a FALSE advantage, whereas the facts
about Nuclear Reactors are as follows:
> 1. The life of a Nuclear reactor is about thirty years.
> 2. During this time the risk of accidents like Three Mile Island
(and many more unpublicized) cannot be ruled out.
> 3. After thirty years a nuclear Reactor is worse than a grave
yard, about which Late Bob hope used to say: "I don't know why they
build fences around the graveyards. Neither anyone can get out nor
anyone wants to get in."
> In exactly anomalous way, the Reactors keep on producing radiation
harmful to anyone who wants to go near such dead reactors, and are
fenced in, declared out-of-bounds areas.
> 4. The nuclear waste has hundreds of radio-isotopes having
millions of years of half-life, and science has not been to produce
any viable solution to either diminish this radiation or to dispose
off this menace or health hazard capable of producing tumors and
> Concerned and conscientious citizens should protest building of
such power plants and instead request the use of Safe Renewable
Energy alternatives being used on a larger scale in the world than
in the United States. Wind, Solar (Photovoltaic & Thermal), Biomass,
microhydro, and geothermal offer long-term safe solutions for
mankind to not only diminish the Carbon emissions, reduce Earth
Warming, and lessen the risk to human health effecting the
productivity and rising health care cost around the world. Even
countries like Germany and Austria are planning to decommission
their nuclear power plants in a few years substituting their energy
derived from Renewable sources. Moreover, as Eisenhower declared in
1953, "ATOMS for PEACE," but as it turns out ATOM is no longer for
PEACE but for WAR.
> Bashir A. Syed
> Member: APS, IEEE (NSRE & NPSS), Union of Concerned Scientists,
Amer. Solar Energy Society, and New York Academy of Sciences. Senior
Member International Solar Energy Society. Fulbright and NSF
> Vice President, R&D
> Alt-EnergyTech, Inc.
> 1120 NASA Parkway, suite 220W
> Houston, TX 77058
> Tel: 281-333-9889/Fax: 281-461-1150/Cell: 713-560-6668.