View Poll Results: The Government Should Invest In...

Voters
47. You may not vote on this poll
  • Solar

    9 19.15%
  • Wind

    3 6.38%
  • Geothermal

    1 2.13%
  • Nuclear

    22 46.81%
  • Oil

    0 0%
  • Coal

    1 2.13%
  • Hydroelectric

    1 2.13%
  • Other

    10 21.28%
Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 106

Thread: Energy Policy

  1. #51
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Energy Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Well let's do some math. On average it's about a billion per plant. To actually replace coal and gas as well as reduce carbon emissions, it's somewhere around a thousand nuclear plants. That's a trillion dollars.
    That's not that expensive, relatively speaking.

    Over what time period?
    Over the same amount of time it takes Obama to spend $787 billion on "stimulating" the economy.

  2. #52
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Energy Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    That's not that expensive, relatively speaking.
    In terms of government spending it is.

    Over the same amount of time it takes Obama to spend $787 billion on "stimulating" the economy.
    I gotta ask. If Obama's spending plan was so evil, why is spending MORE not as bad?
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  3. #53
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Energy Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Well let's do some math. On average it's about a billion per plant. To actually replace coal and gas as well as reduce carbon emissions, it's somewhere around a thousand nuclear plants. That's a trillion dollars.



    Over what time period?
    Where are you getting these numbers from?

    France has 59 nuclear power plants which provide 425 TWh of electricity. Total consumption for the entire country was 451 TWh.


    Because the US uses more electricity per capita than France, our total usage is 3,816 TWh. Thus, to power the entire country's electrical needs, we would need 545 plants.

    Then, you have to consider the fact that the French plants are generally old and underpowered. The majority of them are 900 MWe plants, while the current generation of plants are 1650 MWe. Once you adjust for that, we would only need 297 of the new plants to cover our entire country's needs. Given that we already have 104, I don't think that this is so difficult to imagine implementing.

    In terms of cost, you actually underestimated the expense associated with these plants. Estimates for each new plant in the US are $6-10 billion. If we take the middle figure of $8b and apply that to all 300 plants, that's $2.4T in total cost.

    Now, the total cost of electricity in the US per year is $372b (9.78 cents/KWh * 3,816 TWh). That means that we would recoup the entire cost of all 300 nuclear plants in approximately 6.45 years.

    That seems like a good investment to me.

    (I know that I've ignored the costs of actually running the plants, but it appears to be relatively trivial compared to the costs of building/insuring the plants. If you like, tack on another $1b per plant and add a year or so to the total time.)
    Last edited by RightinNYC; 08-19-09 at 12:36 AM.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  4. #54
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Energy Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    I gotta ask. If Obama's spending plan was so evil, why is spending MORE not as bad?
    It just depends on why you're spending the money. In my opinion, building a sustainable and comprehensive energy infrastructure is a thousand times more beneficial than some faux-stimulus package.

    My point was that if our country can justify spending $787 billion on "stimulating" the economy then there's no reason why we couldn't justify spending $300 billion more on a nuclear infrastructure.

    *Disclaimer: I didnít imply that Obamaís spending plan was evil.

  5. #55
    Sage
    UtahBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,687

    Re: Energy Policy

    Nuke plants MAKE money...whatever the upfront cost, they make money....so the public pays for them by turning on their electric devices in their homes.
    Oracle of Utah
    Truth rings hollow in empty heads.

  6. #56
    Count Smackula
    rathi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    10-31-15 @ 10:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,890

    Re: Energy Policy

    Can you please abide by the parameters of the thread and just choose one? I fully understand that no one source of energy is viable on its own. I'm simply wanting to know which specific one is currently the most viable investment.
    I will, provided you admit your parameters are absurdly unrealistic and have no basis for anything resembling energy policy.

  7. #57
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Energy Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by rathi View Post
    I will, provided you admit your parameters are absurdly unrealistic and have no basis for anything resembling energy policy.
    What? I don't know what you're talking about. This is just a hypothetical. Just ASSUME something is true and make a decision. Why is that so hard?

  8. #58
    Count Smackula
    rathi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    10-31-15 @ 10:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,890

    Re: Energy Policy

    What? I don't know what you're talking about. This is just a hypothetical. Just ASSUME something is true and make a decision. Why is that so hard?
    In your hypothetical situation, nuclear is the most viable option. Fossil fuels have the obvious problems we see today, and wind/solar/hydro-electric/geothermal is too circumstantial to power the entire nation by itself. A large scale energy storage system would make solar or wind capable of powering the entire nation, but such a system has yet to be developed. All things considered, nuclear is the most practical as a single solution with current technology.

    As long as you understand that this argument only applies in hypothetical ethereal-land and not reality, than i have no problem with it.

  9. #59
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Energy Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by rathi View Post
    In your hypothetical situation, nuclear is the most viable option. Fossil fuels have the obvious problems we see today, and wind/solar/hydro-electric/geothermal is too circumstantial to power the entire nation by itself. A large scale energy storage system would make solar or wind capable of powering the entire nation, but such a system has yet to be developed. All things considered, nuclear is the most practical as a single solution with current technology.

    As long as you understand that this argument only applies in hypothetical ethereal-land and not reality, than i have no problem with it.
    Oh, so people can't postulate or speculate or spitball without it being some delusional fantasy? Real creative attitude you have. And please do not refer disparagingly to "ethereal-land"...it's a very nice place.



    Anyway, thank you for your thoughtful and reasoned response. I'm glad that you agree that nuclear energy is the best stuff ever!

  10. #60
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Energy Policy

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Yeah, you are a libertarian, so I guessed that.
    One doesn't have to be a libertarian in order to respect the Constitution...

Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •