[ RadSafe ] Obama announces loan guarantees for two nuclear reactors

Thu Feb 18 10:30:49 CST 2010

Hi Maury and Dog :},

I believe you may be thinking of the Zimmer plant on the banks of the mighty Ohio, now lined with yet more coal barges, I can say. It was once an almost complete BWR, but was converted to coal in the 80's.   A quick search in Wikipedia will give you a longer story.  I moved to the area after that happened and had many years to drive by in wonder of our societal madness :}   

It now contributes both power and another coal plume to the region..   Maybe next time......    

Best,

Brad 

Bradly D. Keck, PhD, CHP
Chief Technology Officer
Vitalea Science, Inc.
2121 Second Street, Suite B101
Davis CA 95618

Ph: 530-341-0208
Fx: 530-341-0299
brad.keck at vitaleascience.com

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_H._Zimmer_Power_Station

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On Behalf Of Maury Siskel
Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2010 12:54 AM
To: Richard D. Urban Jr.
Cc: radsafe at radlab.nl
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Obama announces loan guarantees for two nuclear reactors

Thanks very much for your comprehensive review. My recall I guess is 
flawed -- thought there was an entire NPP that was nearly finished and 
then halted by the anti-nuclear zealots of the day going to court and 
via other means.

In any case, I hope there is a resumption coming, but I will believe it 
when we see a plant undergoing preliminary testing prior to going on 
line. It appears to me that too many in the Administration are deeply 
opposed, but in the fullness of time ....

Thanks again for the great summary,
Maury&Dog  (MaurySiskel  maurysis at peoplepc.com)
==============================

Richard D. Urban Jr. wrote:

>Are you possibly referring to Sacramento Municiple Utility District's RANCHO SECO Nuclear Generating Station? 
>Rancho Seco operated at ONLY 39% capacity from 1975 to 1989 due to BAD management, and was closed down after a NON-BINDING referendum, in which I believe only about 3% of the public turned out and the referendum passed by just over 50% of those that turned out... so IOW, LESS than TWO percent of those registered voted to shut the plant down...However, the majority of the SMUD board at the time was overwhelmingly ANTI-nuclear, and so pushed forward with the plant closure.
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rancho_Seco_Nuclear_Generating_Station
>http://www.nrc.gov/info-finder/decommissioning/power-reactor/rancho-seco-nuclear-generating-station.html
>
>HUMBOLDT BAY, operated from '63 - '76 before shuttering due to cost of seismic/post TMI mods...
>http://www.nrc.gov/info-finder/decommissioning/power-reactor/humboldt-bay-nuclear-power-plant-unit-3.html
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humboldt_Bay_Nuclear_Power_Plant
>
>VALLECITOS, also operated for a number of years and still has a research reactor on site...
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vallecitos_Nuclear_Center   And of course there was San Onofre Unit 1...
>
>These are the only former California POWER reactors I am aware of, but there was also Shoreham on Long Island, which did low power testing but never went online due to NY Gov. Cuomo not issuing NY state evacuation E-plans... Several TVA plants where construction stopped (some of which have since restarted construction or gone online), several Washington sites which suffered the same fate, Perry 2 and Zimmer in Ohio, Midland in MI, Marble Hill in IN, and a couple of others (anyone remember the movie 'The Abyss' filmed in a half built containment dome)...  Many of of these were at high percentage of completion (>80%) (some of which have been converted to non-nuke generation), but most were halted due to economics, not public opposition.
>
>The other possibility you may have been referring to was the misguided law passed in CA that forbade the dumping of waste with ANY detectable radioactivity, to the levels of 'Best Available Technology'.  Initial reading at the time would have even prohibited say a farmer turning over a bad crop of almonds or raisins back into the ground, because of the NORM concentrated in the crop... not sure what finally became of that one, but it has since been updated with more recent compact state agreement laws.  Barbara Hamrick could maybe elaborate on that one if she's still around, I remember her posting about it back then.
>
>BTW, I am currently at Plant Hatch, sister station to Vogtle, and scheduled to go there in just a few weeks.  Excavation at Vogtle 3-4 is nearly complete, and they have been going ahead full steam in anticipation of both the loan guarantees and NRC approval...  They are SERIOUS about this.  COL and community support means it will not be another Shoreham, Harry Reid and the Anti-s be damned.
>
>Also, in answer to the question, you don't need NRC approval to dig a hole ;-)
>
>radmax
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>  
>
>>From: edmond0033 at comcast.net
>>Sent: Feb 17, 2010 10:59 PM
>>To: Maury Siskel <maurysis at peoplepc.com>
>>Cc: "Mike Brennan (DOH)" <Mike.Brennan at DOH.WA.GOV>, radsafe at radlab.nl
>>Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Obama announces loan guarantees for two nuclear	reactors
>>
>>
>>
>>That one I don't remember, but knowing 'bankrupt' CA, I'm sure it's true. 
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message ----- 
>>From: "Maury Siskel" <maurysis at peoplepc.com> 
>>To: edmond0033 at comcast.net 
>>Cc: "Mike Brennan (DOH)" <Mike.Brennan at DOH.WA.GOV>, radsafe at radlab.nl 
>>Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2010 7:24:20 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern 
>>Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Obama announces loan guarantees for two nuclear        reactors 
>>
>>Didn't the State of California once dismantle a nearly completed nuclear 
>>power plant just before it was ready to go on line to produce energy? We 
>>are remarkable creatures! 
>>Maury&Dog 
>>================= 
>>edmond0033 at comcast.net wrote: 
>>
>>    
>>
>>>I may believe it when they first break ground.  Only then I will belive when it goes on line.  Remember Shorehum!!!   
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Ed Baratta 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>edmond0033 at comcast.net 
>>>
>>>
>>>----- Original Message ----- 
>>>From: "Mike Brennan (DOH)" <Mike.Brennan at DOH.WA.GOV> 
>>>To: radsafe at radlab.nl 
>>>Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2010 5:13:47 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern 
>>>Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] Obama announces loan guarantees for two nuclear reactors 
>>>
>>>Hi, Maury.   
>>>
>>>You are overlooking that in an urban, industrial society, energy in 
>>>general and electricity in particular fails to meet any of the three 
>>>criteria necessary for a free market to exist (the barriers to entry as 
>>>a supplier must be low, all parties must have enough information and 
>>>understanding to make informed choices, and society must be willing to 
>>>accept the consequences of a sizable portion of the population doing 
>>>without the goods or services in question).  Barring technological 
>>>breakthroughs (and likely even then) energy markets will always be 
>>>manipulated; the only question is by who and for what purpose.   
>>>
>>>Energy works better as infrastructure than as an unregulated profit 
>>>generator. 
>>>
>>>-----Original Message----- 
>>>From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>----------------snipped--------------- 
>>_______________________________________________
>>You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>>
>>Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html
>>
>>For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/
>>    
>>
>
>
>  
>

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/