Sandy curtails nuclear plants, oldest under alert

Comments (11)
McBob08 wrote:

Now watch the anti-nuclear power mob try to present nuclear power stations showing due diligence to safety as some kind of excuse to stop using nuclear power. Between the typical alternative to Nuclear — Coal Fired Plants, Nuclear is much safer, emits less radiation (yes, Coal mining releases significant amounts of nuclear radiation), much cleaner and much more environmentally friendly.

Oct 30, 2012 3:54am EDT  --  Report as abuse
morbas wrote:

And, across the nation spent fuel rods accumulate at each of these ‘environmentally safe’ plants because there is no national storage facility. And acceptable Transport to USA Las Vegas facility is issue for every MIMBY along the route. Public opinion is supported by every transport accident and inability of responsible parties to be held accountable to the true environmental costs and fair restitution and relocation of each and every victim’s property. The Nuclear environmental is ‘green’ record for everyone else.

Oct 30, 2012 4:23am EDT  --  Report as abuse
ALALAYIIIAAAA wrote:

bob@
your biggest problem right now is the sharks in the streets not the coal’s emissions

Oct 30, 2012 6:21am EDT  --  Report as abuse
upstater wrote:

Constellation Energy Nuclear Group merged with Exelon last April.

Oct 30, 2012 7:58am EDT  --  Report as abuse
ChemJanine wrote:

Nuclear is never and has NEVER been shown to be safe. As a chemist and an “anti- nuclear nut” the risks associated with this mode of energy due to the awakening of the earth’s plates at the moment would only see these plants leach and breech. As for the train travel, we have a nuclear train in the UK which runs to our nuclear waste facility in Cumbria – it is easy to get to the waste as it is isn’t really guarded and it is going through highly populated areas (London) as well as other cities and towns. Personally, nuclear energy is something which should be ditched long long ago.

Oct 30, 2012 12:58pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

ALALAYIIIAAAA wrote:

“bob@
your biggest problem right now is the sharks in the streets not the coal’s emissions”

It’s OK because the Jets will take out the Sharks.

“When you’re a Jet,
You’re a Jet all the way
From your first cigarette
To your last dyin’ day.”

Oct 30, 2012 1:28pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Paxus wrote:

4 reactors have now been forced off line and 3 are slowed by hurricane Sandy. It is wise to remember that Sandy is short for the Greek name Cassandra, the cursed prophetess from myth whose warnings of coming disaster were ignored.

http://funologist.org/2012/10/30/what-hurricane-sandy-really-tells-us/

Oct 30, 2012 5:37pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Overcast451 wrote:

“much more environmentally friendly.”

Tell that to people in Chernobyl.

Oct 30, 2012 6:34pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Simon.Pester wrote:

QUOTE–
“The nuclear industry has said that the spent fuel rods at Fukushima were never exposed to the air.”

The nuclear industry is noted for telling whopping lies, isn’t it? Such a shame that the press is pro-nuclear, but that’s obvious from the common ownership of media and nuclear investments. Even Public Radio gets bigtime energy company bribes-sponsorship. Fukushima has been way underplayed.

Oct 30, 2012 6:43pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
kiwibird wrote:

We are lucky in N.Z. – no nuclear power. I feel sorry for you folks overseas, all those ageing reactors, a walking time bomb.

Oct 30, 2012 11:39pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Paxus wrote:

Reuters makes a fairly significant mistake in this article that because the reactor is shut down, cooling pumps are not necessary. Even after the fuel has been removed from the reactor (independent of whether power is being generated or now) nuclear fuel needs to be actively cooled for three years to avoid the release of radioactive gas.

Oct 31, 2012 6:40am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.