Sentences with phrase «onofre nuke plant»

You see, up until that ballot vote, the Town Board of Riverhead, in the hope of tax revenues the plant would bring, strongly backed LILCO's nuke plant plan.

The 72 - megawatt array would benefit from existing transmission lines and a substation built for the never - used nuke plant.

The AG has recently signed onto a petition that would require the facility, one fo the oldest operating nuke plants in the country, to assess its operating limitations.

NEW LIFE FOR NUKE PLANTS?

But for 50 or so nations currently running or constructing nuke plants, the calamity was an incentive to take a moment to run some stress tests and review the safety manuals before reaffirming their support for nuclear power.

(The largest nuke plant in the U.S. has an output of just 3.2 gigawatts.)

Thank heavens and Ed that we know that not one of these poor souls will die, since, by official decree, no one anywhere can ever die from nuclear radiation from a nuke plant!

Four Westinghouse AP1000 (Gen III) nuke plants are now being built (two in Georgia, two in South Carolina).

Worse yet, no one ever built a demonstration AP1000 nuke plant to prove they really are passively safe.

If we want to reduce CO2 emissions, make the coal, gas, and oil fired powerplants install CO2 scrubbers / processors and give tax incentives and lawsuit immunity to private investment for Nuke Plants.

Ended up as an Engineer at a nuke plant.

A thousand new wind turbines in Maine can not perform the crucial work performed by one nuke plant like the soon - closing 680 megawatt Pilgrim Nuclear Plant in Massachusetts.

Georgia is experiencing a huge drought — and as many Georgians hopefully know by now, coal and nuke plants use a whoppping 67 % of Georgia's water supply.

Grid operator says nuke plant closures aren't a threat to keeping the lights on.

A likely answer is that California is so focused and busy on environmental projects that redistribute wealth to various constituencies that they no longer are concerned about public safety (the San Bruno natural gas line explosion in San Francisco in 2010, the constant blow ups of water pipes under the streets of Los Angeles, the retrofitting of the San Onofre Nuke Plant, so that it could be a peaker plant that could ramp up and down to back up intermittent green power, failed and the plant was shut down eventually resulting in the South West Blackout in 2011).

(The successful minor ecotage of a powerline connected to the Palo Verde Nuke Plant in Arizona in 1986 triggered the Justice Department's infamous operation against Arizona Earth First!

I recall John McCain proposed building 30 or more nuke plants as part of his 2008 campaign, but America rejected that.

Look at French and US nuke plants.

The same nearly happened at the Siuth's other nuke plant under construction.

Build nuke plants and ration fuel are two examples of very effective solutions.

Your love of fission and centralized nuke plants comes out in every post, but unfortunately seems to blind you to fast developing alternatives.

Check this out, 300x more toxic than a Nuke plant producing the same amount of energy.

That's not true, 1) because most coastal nuke plants have cooling towers, and 2) climate - driven sea level rise isn't of the 30 - meter magnitude that did Fukushima in, and even if it were, there's time to adapt.

They will willfully fail to understand science's judgement that there is no safe level of radiation exposure, the less the better (And By God never reveal that nuke plants emit routinely release radiation into the unsuspecting surrounding communities).

The idea is to avoid extra ionizing radiation, especially the kinds coming from nuke plants and nuke weapons and medical xrays, when possible because there is always the chance that they can cause DNA damage.

About radiation and nuke plants, here's some major recent studies that indicate a relationship between proximity to nuke plants and cancer.

That plus proximity to nuke plants which release radiation.

IF private investors want to build multi-billion dollar nuke plants, fine, but the nuclear lobby has been feeding at the trough for far too long.

There's a slim chance that if our nation pulled in one direction that we could get a decent portion of our electric generation out of new nuke plants 6 - 10 years from now if we start building like crazy now.

A new baseload nuke plant can't help that.

Worse, nuke plants require water for cooling and would be shutdown in summer drought just when the AC load peaks.

On top of that also add the waste heat from electric power stations, and even the thermal pollution from nuke plants (Even though they do not emit co2) and airplanes and I reckon that is a lot of heat energy that used to be a form of carbon now warming up the atmosphere.

(Oh, that nuke plant will only cost $ 3 billion.

Haiti is unlikely to afford nuke plants but can develop solar, wind and tidal.

Never heard him say a word about the nuke plants.»

Not exact matches

SYRACUSE, N.Y. — A federal judge today dismissed a lawsuit challenging New York's groundbreaking subsidies for nuclear plants, clearing the way for three Upstate nukes to continue collecting roughly $ 483 million a year from utility ratepayers.

I'm also 100 % for riding the butts of the power companies that own the nukes — if they don't follow the safety rules / laws relating to nuclear power plants.

Entergy Corp. cranked up the heat Friday in its negotiations with the state on the future of the FitzPatrick nuclear plant in Oswego County, telling investors that the plant is such a money - losing stinker that the nuke is worth almost $ 1 billion less than what it showed on the company books.

Without that added compensation, many nukes have trouble competing with gas - fired power plants, which benefit from low natural gas prices.

Our national energy policy should also support the standardization of nuclear power plant design, an idea that Energy Secretary Steven Chu has recently endorsed (see «Micro Nukes,» page 38).

A SHORTAGE of tritium, a key ingredient of nuclear weapons, could spur the US administration to open more plants, despite President Barack Obama's declared goal of eliminating nukes.

For one thing, a bundle of micro nukes would collectively produce just as much nuclear waste as a conventional plant generating the same amount of power.

To speed things up further, NuScale is initially marketing its micro nukes in bundles of 12 set up to replace existing nuclear power plants — which means that the company will not have to wait for approval of specific sites, since the go - ahead will already be in place.

If the USA had taken Hansen's advice back in the late 1980's and gone on a crash program of building next generation nukes there was probably a chance we could be exporting that technology now to China and India and it might have prevented the commissioning of many of the new coal power plants they are building.

Jerry Brown addresses a crowd of nearly 30,000 people at a «No Nukes» Rally in San Luis Obispo, promising to oppose construction of diablo canyon nuclear power plant

New nukes in the US The Tennessee Valley Authority announced today that it will seek licenses for two new nuclear plants

Building as many more nuke power plants as we can manage will help people.

Ironically, Greenpeace legislators within the German parliament killed German nukes off based on Fukushima hysteria, thus forcing the largest expansion of coal - fired power plants in Germany's history!

If we replace coal plants with nukes, we create a lot of jobs and we have a lot of relatively inexpensive energy.

The reason there is so much frantic fervor for nukes is that a nuclear plant can monopolise energy production, and can be somewhat cheaper if long run impacts are excluded from consideration.