Campaign Promise #1 – Nuclear Power

I promise to investigate, push, nag, explain, champion and do everything else in my very unconsiderable power to get the United States to implement a Nuclear Power program.

We need to break the cycle of buying petroleum products from the Middle East, Russia and Venezuela.  We must stop supplying them with so much of our money.

Though we have tons of oil, natural gas and coal, I believe we should reserve most of that for transportation.

We can and should utilize a natural resource that is efficient, radically non-polluting and safe.  Uranium is that resource.

Hyperion Power Generation, Inc. has developed shed sized nuclear generators that can power 20,000 homes.

Tyler Hamilton of the Star writes:

It’s efficient because power is generated where it’s used. It’s flexible because projects can be built quickly when needed. It saves money in the long run because there’s less need for expensive transmission lines that carry the power elsewhere. And if one generator fails, its relatively small size means it doesn’t threaten the stability of the entire system.

THAT’s what I’m talking about – this system of nuclear power generation, if viable, solves many problems all at once.

Power Grid: The fragility of our current power grid and it’s susceptability to terrorist attack, human and other failure is deeply troubling.

Loss of Power In Transmission: As has already been mentioned here in regards to electric vehicles, power can not be transferred across mediums and along long distances with out losing power.  That is one of the huge reasons that solar power produced in Death Valley is not a feasible power source.  You can not take it from there to here with out loosing power rendering it either vastly expensive and inefficient.  If your power source is local you are not shedding as much power thus you are more efficient.

Pollution: Nuclear is clean.

This form of nuclear power provision is relatively cheap.

‘Our goal is to generate electricity for 10 cents a kilowatt hour anywhere in the world,’ said John Deal, chief executive of Hyperion. ‘They will cost approximately $25m [£16m] each. For a community with 10,000 households, that is a very affordable $2,500 per home.’

And so, my promise is to fight for more nuclear power.

Thank you for your support.  Go Piranhas!!!!

Advertisements
This entry was posted in All About Me, Saavedra 2010 and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Campaign Promise #1 – Nuclear Power

  1. Camy says:

    You say nuclear is clean. It still generates waste that must go somewhere. Washington State has had nuclear facilities for many years. Now we are dealing with the radioactive pollution in our water table, our soil, our rivers and in the sickened bodies of many of our residents. We have studies that show increased pockets of cancers in places that documented wind patterns laid down radiation.

    http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/radiation/brochure/profile_Hanford.htm
    http://www.doh.wa.gov/hanford/publications/health/mon3.htm
    http://www.doh.wa.gov/hanford/publications/health/mon11.htm

    No state or country really wants the depleted product. Oh wait, we can go to war with the armament that recycles the stuff! Then we can leave it there (in somebody else’s country) after we have blown up “the enemy”.

    Seen the pictures yet of what happens to pregnancies and the babies born to mothers exposed to that stuff?

    So I am not convinced that it is safe. Maybe they have fixed the problems. I just don’t trust them.

  2. vivianlouise says:

    Camy, that’s ridiculous to say something like I’m going to start a war just so that I can toss the waste in another country. Come on.

    The site you linked to was in operation between 1944 – 1971. Obviously, the technology has advanced greatly since then, as has our understanding of what nuclear radiation does to the living. In the early years of the Manhattan Project, the scientists didn’t know enough to avoid radiating themselves. Now they do.

    I realize that there is depleted product to deal with, which can be used as I’m suggesting – in breeder reactors. Instead of burying it, a silly and stupid waste, breeder reactors can use depleted uranium to produce electricity in small garden shed sized units. The units are closed, sealed in concrete, have no working parts and won’t leak. The uranium and plutonium is not weaponizable.
    http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-nuclear-breeder-reactor.htm

    Jimmy Carter made it law that all depleted uranium must be buried instead of using it to produce electricity. That needs to be changed.

    Obviously, dumping it into the water table is bad. Of course I don’t recommend that. I’m also obviously against burying it – what a waste of fissionable material.

    I do think it’s currently the only viable option to power our country, lower imports from overseas, and ensure our power grid is protected and sufficiently diverse.

    Solar and wind are not practical. They neither produce enough power nor is that power able to be transported efficiently.

    I’m all for alternative energy, nuclear is a good, safe and efficient alternative.

    Also, Thank You! I love that you commented. It makes me really really happy when my family reads my blog. And especially when they take the time to leave a comment. It blesses me. No sarcasm. All truth.

Comments are closed.