Reader comments
Guv opposes nuclear plant in Utah

70 comments   |   Read story

Closet Liberal | 12:50 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
The guv is a closet liberal. This is evidenced by the fact that he has joined a government global warming panel, opposes a nuclear power plant, and many other things. I will not vote for him if he runs again.
Emily | 1:59 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
I don't understand why DesNews insists on using Guv. If they are going to abbreviate, at least use Gov. It's ridiculous.
Go Nukes | 2:11 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
Utah is in many ways as liberal as California. This shows once again the limited understanding of Utah leadership and many of its citizens. The debate on this is emotional, not based on fact, and one that keeps Utah on the fringe of environmental reality.
Comments continue below
Anti Business | 3:35 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
Let's see, first jump into the sack with Schwarzenegger on global warming, which will be proved eventually to be like saying the world is flat. Kill the coal mining industry. Kill nukes. I guess we can just magically have electricity just appear out of the air. But then based on Huntsman's superior attitude & demeanor, I'm sure he'll be able to command it to appear. Watch for massive brown outs and black outs within just a few years, if not sooner. And I'm a Republican, who's sorry for how I voted!!

Huntsman is nuts | 3:41 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
Where is Huntsman's logic coming from? He will drive all industry from our state. He has been an absolute disaster as a governor.
lost in DC | 4:08 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
Again Huntsman disappoints. He opposes nuclear, the most efficient technology available, producing the most power from the least natural resource inputs. Would he have us continue importing more oil and natural gas for power plants, which are much less efficient, and the purchase of which enriches our enemies, be they islamic radicals or communist Venezualan dictators? Continuing to build new natural gas powered plants drives up demand for natural gas and its price, making it more expensive to heat my home. No one talks of the hazards of natural gas. At least two supertankers of compressed natural gas are imported into Boston each week. If a terrorist were to hit the transfer valve at the offloading point with a shoulder fired rocket it would have the same effect as a nuclear bomb. And Boston is only one port of many into which this stuff comes. Nuclear has to be explored and given full consideration.

Or we can continue with more coal fired plants, which are becoming cleaner all the time. I get warm and fuzzy knowing people risk their lives in dirty holes extracting coal. But hey, they are just nameless faces, half of them probably illegals (sarcasm).
Get Real | 5:24 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
It's been obvious for over thirty years that nuclear is the only large scale option for replacing greenhouse gas producing power production, but nuclear paranoia has pushed us in the other direction since 1979. I suspected Huntsman's global warming initiatives were political posturing; this position confirms it. We'll know greens are serious about global warming when they embrace nuclear power. Its the only option that allows us to meet the power needs of a modern society without producing greenhouse gases. None of the other options scale up to where they make a difference.
Agree | 7:15 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
I agree with the general sentiment. The governor has turned out to be another RINO (republican in name only). He and Arnold make quite the pair. I donated and campaigned for him last time; never again. It's time the majority conservatives in this state elect a true conservative.
Luddite | 7:16 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
His statement is only a euphamism for saying "NO" in liberal bureaucratic-speak. He and our former "not over my dead body" governor share a narrow minded view of the world and of energy policy. The proposal to store waste out west and this current proposal are completely unrelated.

Using the "guv's" logic, then we should stop mining coal until we find a solution for CO2 emissions; we should stop drilling for oil until we bring global warming into check...

Also, please note that he used the liberal buzzwords, their panacea for power generation: solar and wind. Solar and wind are going to make everything all better and we won't need any other type of power...
nottyou | 7:17 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
If you look at the safety record it makes sense to have a nuclear plant in Utah. I support this lower cost and efficient source of energy.
Closet Conservative | 7:19 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
No, I think the Governor is a "Closet Conservative" because he opposes putting Utah into a position where its energy will require all sorts of federal subsidies. Throughout the 20th century, nuclear power required the most subsidies of any energy source -- government subsidies for the insurance and waste. If nuclear is truly the way to go, let Wall Street put up the money and let the free market rule!
Nuclear Power is Safe & Smart | 7:25 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
A few points:
1)Why does everything have to be liberal/conservative? Can't something just be good bad for the state?
2)TMI proved the system works and that nuclear power in the U.S. is safe. If you have to go back 30 years for an accident, it is safe.
3)Nuclear power doesn't pollute. The "waste" is almost entirely reusable fuel.
4)If you don't want to pay for a power plant, you sure won't want to pay even more to recycle spent fuel. However, a reactor that runs on spent fuel would really benefit this country.
5)The new Gen III and Gen III+ use passive safety systems that don't require an operator in case of an accident (operator error was problem in TMI), meaning they are even more safe than 30 years ago.
6)Nuclear power is comparable in cost to coal if coal power was charged a carbon emission tax. Nuclear power plants already pay a tax on the spent fuel they create.
Lastly, don't write a blank check to the company that would build a power plant, but it will most likely need to be subsidized since there will never be a tax on carbon emissions.
John | 7:26 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
What does the Governor want us to use for electricity? He's opposed to coal and nuclear. As a nation we are now importing natural gas. Wind and solar are unreliable. Guess his "Turn off the Lights" debacle is his solution.
Ignorance is bliss | 7:35 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
It is highly disingenuous of Gov. Huntsman to claim there are high risks involved with a nuclear reactor, and then refer to the Three Mile Island accident. We learned from the mistakes from Three Mile Island - the fact that the facility still operates and hasn't had any other kind of accident since 1979 proves that.

An ignorant Governor, leading an ignorant state. "Cleaner coal" is just another ignorant catchphrase from the coal companies that ignorant people believe - coal plants are one of the primary producers of greenhouse gases, and will be until they can implement technologies to capture CO2 emissions.
Fedup | 7:42 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
Solar and wind are suppliments not the total answer. If you really want to save the planet, then Nuclear is the answer. The Gov. needs to have his energy advisors look again. There have been drastic changes in Nuclear technology in the form of waste management. The problem is, he will not be in office when the brownouts occur. His predisessor will have to deal with his short sightedness. I guess another answer is to prepare all of the Citizens of Utah by having us turn off our power for 1 hour a night. I for one do not want to revert to past ages where electricity was only a luxury for the rich.
Boo on Huntsman | 7:47 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
Okay, CA and UT cities are bailing out on coal-powered generation, are we going to pipe electricity from China? Are we going to have hundreds of acres of power generating windmills or solar arrays around the state? NO! Nuclear is the only environmental-friendly way to meet our future power needs with a small footprint compared to windmills and arrays. Huntsman is shortsighted and this is just another PR stand so Huntsman can get printed in the paper again...again...and again.

When Envirocare changed to EnergySolutions, didn't their media release mention they could now reprocess/recycle used nuclear fuel with their new partners/acquisitions? If true, seems like all the pieces are here but the plant...
aaron | 7:49 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
I would like to hear what the Gov. wants to actually do for the state besides running away business. Think of the high paid jobs a project like that would create... Think how many lawyers could be employed for the next 10 years?

As a conservative, I get further and further dissapointed with the lack of vision that Gov. Huntsman continues to provide. He sold us out on legacy highway to make a deal with the devil. He fails to do anything substantive when it comes to tax reduction, yet the state continues to have surpluses.He funds and bloats education without doing any analysis, just giving in to the demands of UEA. And John, how much money does education and the rainy day fund need?

Give us some vision John.. Please!

Jeff | 7:52 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
I could see the writing on the wall when Huntsman was so opposed to nuclear waste in Utah. Unlike the products of the burning of fossil fuels, which can affect people hundreds of miles away, nuclear waste is safe unless you're close to it. Saying that there is no way to safety transport and store it in this state is absurd. There are places so remote and inhospitable that nuclear waste could be there for centuries with no effects to the public whatsoever. The people who rant against nuclear power would sing a different tune if their chosen sources of power, wind and solar, turn out to be inadequate and power shortages affect them. They are not the kind of people who would quietly endure brown-outs and power outages. I'm always appalled when our elected officials promote fear and hysteria. Fortunately, it seems that cooler heads eventually prevail. It's good to see so many here.
Gretzky | 7:58 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
Go Nukes is absolutely correct. Silver Spooner Governator once again shows his inadequacies to lead this great state. Energy Solutions provides everything we need to have a wonderfully safe nuclear power plant. On-site nuclear waste disposal is ridiculous. So instead of one localized repository for waste the Guv wants to create multiple waste sites. Very nice.
Nuclear is also not the only way to go. it is part of the whole energy solution plan. we should be investing in solar power, wind power, etc. solar power is actually becoming quite affordable for home owners built right into the roof tops. we need contractors with more vision than what the gov has. Too bad Mitt Romney can't take over our state if he loses the pres. bid. He's a true visionary leader.
John 2 | 8:13 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
The governor has his head buried in the sand like an Ostrich. The longer we wait for the inevitable use of nuclear power the more it will cost, or does he want us to have a windmill in every yard at an approximate cost of $1,000,000 each? John Pingree was castigated for his forward looking approach to transportation by endorsing light rail which appears to be a success. We need a forward looking individual not someone filled with fear in order to advance the state and protect the citizens from huge costs for energy. We lived in a country for a year that had daily rolling blackouts and it wasn't fun. Let's fix our future energy problems now with the only viable answer - nuclear power.
Liberals "Luv" Nukes | 8:18 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
France generates something like 75% of electricity with Nuclear Power Stations. The Frogs are as liberal as they come. How come the Guv can't follow the example of the Peoples Republic of France? Whats next, "Hairy Leg" tax credits?
Chuck | 8:19 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
Vanessa Pearce is quoted as saying "that building a nuclear reactor here is inconsistent with state policy". It is sad that "state policy" is so reactionary as to prohibit consideration of technologies that will help us overcome the looming energy crunch. A true leader and visionary would help develop policy that would be proactive and lead us into solutions, not prohibitions.
Captain | 8:24 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
This Gov is out of touch - has been his entire life I am afraid. He has betrayed this state and its people too many times. Time for someone who will embrace progress and resist the socialist left.
Ken Baguley | 8:26 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
Guv or no Gov we need high tech nuclear power...I love the above comments...It is the people who know what is needed...Governor Huntsman...Let it go and let's get what is needed. It's O.K. to put the pressure on clean-up, but; don't let this opportunity slip through the cracks of liberalism.
Typical Liberal | 8:30 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
The typical American liberal is an environmental lunatic who protests against American prosperity and business advancement and always opposes our clean nuclear energy alternative. They really do not want American progress.

You vote for a nut job and you get his crazy policies.

If only we could shut junior's power off.
I voted for Matheson | 8:39 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
I don't understand who Huntsman thinks he is representing here. HEAL Utah is a tiny amount of people compared with the vast number of people in the state who will be facing huge energy rate hikes in the upcoming years after Huntsman shuts down coal mining, sells our natural gas to California, and refuses to look at any real solutions. Solar and Wind power are not sufficient to support our whole state.
Carbon-based | 8:45 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
My, for such a "liberal" state, this article has certainly generated a feeding frenzy of comments - from one side only. I wonder why? Does the above selection truly represent the diversity of opinion in this state?
mormon_nuke_in_AZ | 8:47 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
Anyone who thinks that we can solve the energy crisis with renewable energy sources is ignorant and misinformed. Given current technology, nuc energy is the most economical power source currently available.

I have spent many years in the nuc power industry and look forward to building a plant in Utah and retiring there.
Get a Clue | 8:49 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
When will the Governor figure it out. Coal power pollutes the very air he wants clean. He needs to stop listening to the special interest on this nuclear power issue and get a clue. Nuclear power is about the environment. I think in his mind he is trying to look green so that no one will look at the Huntsman pollution record.
Ty | 8:50 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
You people kill me. You complain when they wanted to store wast here. So he stoped it. Now you complain that he wont build a nuk power plant???
Jay | 8:52 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
Do you people know what a nuclear accident would do to people? If while processing reactor fluid, if the fuel explodes (which is extremely likely) the radiation will seep into the surrounding land for decades. You will see hundreds of thousands of children born with thyroid cancer and other diseases. It is not an option. Its not just about waste. You think nuclear power is clean? Most pollution causes sickness and death. However, nuclear pollution causes death for generations to come.
rokinutah | 8:56 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
Maybe somebody can show Huntsman the safe and efficient use of nuclear power. That may get him to approve a nuclear power plant. I still do not believe that Utah tax payers should pitch in for building the plant. Maybe more important at this time than the nuclear power plant is getting some new uranium mills in Southern Utah. Would that just be too good to be true--to mine the uranium, have it milled and then used to produce the power all right here in Utah. What a boost to the poor economy in SE Utah.
WC | 9:02 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
WOW - so critical. I've never seen so much criticism of a republican from a bunch of angry republicans like this before. It's refreshing.
Douglas | 9:03 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
I applaud Huntsman. I thank you, and future generations thank you.
3 Mile Island | 9:09 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
We lived in Pa during the 3-Mile Island incident and it was neither an accident nor operator error--it was sabotage. One of the anti-nuke groups actually warned their people to get out of central Pa that weekend. The later incident at the Peach Bottom plant was sabotage, too--operator admitted it. The real problem at 3MI was that GPU vented radioactive gasses during the clean-up without warning. Our family may actually have some health issues from that. We're also Utah down-winders.
HOWEVER, I still believe nuclear power is feasable. The oil, natural gas (and dare I add coal) industries have a vested interested in continued use of their products, but I don't see how we can continue to generate power at current levels using that technology. We need development of alternatives--nuclear, solar, wind. Hydro-electric is still the cleanest way--and people talk of pulling the Glen Canyon Dam!
This is not a anti-Gov issue--or Rep vs Dem, Lib vs Con--it's a scientific issue. Let's get rid of the emotion and solve the problem scientifically. It's possible, if we would spend half the energy on solving it that we spend making polarized emotionally-based decisions about the issue.
Call him Lord Fauntleroy | 9:26 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
Governor Huntsman's positions seem contradictory. He jumps on the anti-fossil-fuel-because-it-causes-global-warming bandwagon. So one would think he then looks to energy sources that don't produce carbon emissions, right? Well if it's not nuclear, Governor, what is it?? Renewables?? Get real. Renewables are nice, but they are not the answer. Renewables can't possibly begin to even minutely scratch the surface of the energy needs of this country, at least based on current technology.

I wonder if the Governor's handlers are to blame for insulating the Governor from the realities of life.
Bumper | 9:29 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
I say we shut of the power at the "Guv's" house until he finds a "zero carbon footprint" way to generate it. I am so sorry I worked to get this Luddite elected. I apologize.
Craig | 9:35 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
Jay, we don't believe you liberals and your scare tactics. We know Nuclear energy is safe (if they can use it in France for decades without incident, then we surely can). We have brains in Utah (well maybe not, we got tricked by Huntsman the Younger as being a conservative-Not!) Time for the "guv" to go. Back to China where he came from and belongs!
SuttonHoo | 9:35 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
Jon Huntsman, Jr. lacks the intelligence, wisdom and maturity to handle the job of governor. His position on nuclear power is just one more confirming example.
HUH | 9:44 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
Uh, so who's the Republican? It's definitely not Huntsman. He is incredibly out of touch with the people of this state. I'm betting he doesn't even get the Republican nomination next time. Either way, he won't get my vote.
Independent Utahn | 9:51 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
After reading the above comments I am convinced more than ever that a little knowledge is even more dangerous than total ignorance. We seem to have plenty of both in the state. I am neither conservative nor liberal, Republican nor Democrat. I am a Utah-born Independent and try to judge ideas on their merits no matter what the prevailing party/political leaders say. I was under the impression that independent thinking was something valued in this state. I don't mind considering the possibility of all sources of energy generation for the present and future but lets have a discussion truely based on facts and valid assessment of risks and costs and who should be asked to bear those risks and costs. May be the governor turned his nose up on the recent incentive-based deal for a N-plant because it just plain stinks of taxpayer subsidy.
Somewhere lost to this discussion is the significant need and opportunity to 'generate' new energy through improved efficiency and conservation. A more conservation minded attitude is definitely needed regarding all natural resources including water and energy. Just ask the driver of the next Hummer you see on the road.
Let the discussion continue!
Fritz | 9:55 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
Ty: There is a big difference between somebody dumping their trash in your yard for you to take care of and you taking care of your own trash. Nuclear power is far superior to anything else available. We can handle our own waste, and let the other states handle their's.
Jay: Look at the facts. Don't rely on the made-up horror stories of others. Compare the deaths from coal mining to deaths from nuclear power. Give us some solid numbers. Certainly there are risks, but nuclear is a far less risky power source. If you want to look at the environmental impacts, there isn't even a comparison. Nuclear is by far the superior way to go.
TC | 10:08 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
I'm surprized at how strongly many of you feel about the Governor's decision. In my view it is entirely reasonable. As much as many of you feel that nuclear power is the only answer, there are still legitimate concerns. The greatest for me is the waste. One person mentioned that the waste is small, but if it is so small, why is there such a problem with storage and places to put it and why are there so many people concerned with the transportation? IMO this concern must be addressed before this state can go ahead with nuclear power.

Also, from what I understand after discussions with a nuclear physicist, that there are ways to reuse the waste from a nuclear plant, and that that waste can be beneficial, but those processes are not being done in the US for one reason or another. I don't know if I fully understood what he was talking about, but I feel that the waste problem is a problem, no matter how beneficial nuclear power is. Why not allow these problems to be worked out before raking the Governor over the coals?
Huh? | 10:09 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
Jay,

It is extremely likely that processor reactor fuel will explode? Extremely likely?

Your fear mongering aside, nuclear power has proven to be one of the safest forms of power generation (not to mention one of the cleanest) for the past 35 years. You act as if the power plant would be built on West Temple. Even in the UNLIKELY (in fact infintesimal) event that there was an accident, there are hundreds of square miles of open area in central Utah that would provide a huge buffer zone for a nuclear plant, were it built there.

The opponents of nuclear power cannot debate the environmental, safety and economics of nuclear power, so instead they dream up nightmare scenarios that have no basis in fact. Don't be fooled by their shenanigans.

36 of 360,000 votes | 10:12 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
Just another post from a ranting nitwit.
BB | 10:14 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
Jay, where do you get your facts? What makes you think that a reactor "explosion" is likely? The nuclear power industry has operated safely in this country, without major accident, for almost 30 years. Compare that to the safety record of the coal or natural gas industry. And what makes you think "radiation will sink into the ground for decades?" There has to be a source of the radiation, and that source than has to be released to the surrounding environment. Have you ever heard of a containment dome? That is what kept 99 percent of the radionuclides at Three Mile Island INSIDE the reactor plant. Nuclear plants are the cleanest, most efficient sources of power around. You should take some time to visit one, and then compare what you see with other energy generation plants.
John A. Reynolds | 10:25 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
The governor is not up-to-date on this technology.
Comparing a nuclear plant of decades ago is like comparing a Ford Pinto with a new Toyota. Not perfect but worlds better. Keep burning coal and we'll keep creating illnesses in the population.
bruce | 10:31 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
The governor is proving to be a political hack, reacting to what he thinks the electorate wants, not what the state and the world needs.
Nuclear Power is Safe & Smart | 11:42 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007
A few points:
1)Why does everything have to be liberal/conservative? Can't something just be good bad for the state?
2)TMI proved the system works and that nuclear power in the U.S. is safe. If you have to go back 30 years for an accident, it is safe.
3)Nuclear power doesn't pollute. The "waste" is almost entirely reusable fuel.
4)If you don't want to pay for a power plant, you sure won't want to pay even more to recycle spent fuel. However, a reactor that runs on spent fuel would really benefit this country.
5)The new Gen III and Gen III+ use passive safety systems that don't require an operator in case of an accident (operator error was problem in TMI), meaning they are even more safe than 30 years ago.
6)Nuclear power is comparable in cost to coal if coal power was charged a carbon emission tax. Nuclear power plants already pay a tax on the spent fuel they create.
Lastly, don't write a blank check to the company that would build a power plant, but it will most likely need to be subsidized since there will never be a tax on carbon emissions.
TM | 12:13 p.m. Sept. 21, 2007
Not many people know where San Juan County is in Utah. It is in the the South Eastern corner of Utah.

San Juan County and the Navajo Nation are in favor of Nuclear Power and support having a plant built on the San Juan River in San Juan County.

Education and real facts would remove "fear" of nuclear power.

The fuel for the reacators is mined and processed in San Juan county so we may as well use it in the reators it is made for and complete the cycle of use.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.

Advertisement
previousnext

Latest comments

Senator Stephenson isn't proposing raising the tax on the poor. He creating...

We need answers from Hasan

You are deeply deluded.

In one sentence you hit the nail on the head about what is wrong with your...

Democrats talk big about charity, but did you know that Republicans actually...

Letters: Will wrong on warming

Warmer temperatures would be disastrous for Utah. We already struggle to get...

Remember the favorite mantra of "Bush Derangement Syndrome" coming from the...

Letters: Case of sour grapes

I'm not a conservative but I always respected the intellectual underpinnings...

Letters: Will wrong on warming

There is now confirmed data of the actual temps and co2 compiled by an MIT...

How stupid does it get? We can choose to call a people 'Latino' for any...

Spoken like a true user/loser. How much recouse do you think landlords have...

Advertisements
Advertisement