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).
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...
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.
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.
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...
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
- The Who for the Super Bowl 7:08 p.m.
- Thursday's sports transactions 7:06 p.m.
- Holiday festivals offer family fun 6:30 p.m.
- Story of the 'Bells' retold 6:30 p.m.
- Reasons Brooks, Reiner are classics 6:30 p.m.
- Festival of Trees 6:30 p.m.
- Region 7 All-Region Team 6:29 p.m.
- Discovery has come a long way, baby 5:11 p.m.
- Dining out: Scaddy's 5:11 p.m.
- Boyfriend needs to pull own weight 5:11 p.m.
- Man trapped in Nutty Putty cave dies
- Rivalry has had some 'turkeys'
- Cave rescuers committed to free man
- Holiday television program listings
- Highland players make special friend
- Temple Square to use LEDs
- Matt Reynolds vs. Koa Misi
- Missions teach players perseverance
- Salt Lake City woman shot
- Provo star leads Bulldogs to win
- BYU would like friendlier rivalry
261 - Glenn Beck to enter politics?228
- Protests against Phoenix LDS temple210
- RSL wins MLS Cup on penalty kicks202
- Bronco, Kyle rubber match139
- BYU records with win133
- Letters: Rushing to judge Palin131
- Thunder rolls by Jazz130
- Boys basketball rankings117
- Editorial: Poor welcome for Palin112
Latest comments
Cousin, I feel horrible for what happened. The fact that they had him out...
happened because people/voters respected Lavell. Congrats, coach.
There is no question on what Lavell did for BYU football program. Great...
John was one of the most incredible individuals that I have ever met. He was...
Rob, agreed. She does deserve one. But sometimes in situations like this. The...
My family and I are so saddened to hear of the outcome of this story. Our...
My grandfather, Mack Bateman, was one of the survivors of the accident. He...
re: byu turkeys | 5:49 p.m. Nov. 26, 2009 our BEST EVER PLAYERS completely...
Meanwhile the real kids are caught in the middle. What about them?
when you play an inferior team (than your team), there is no need to...
Advertisements