Comments on: What will $10 billion Get You? A Lot of Nuclear Energy http://blog.heritage.org/2008/12/18/what-will-10-billion-get-you-a-lot-of-nuclear-energy/ Tue, 14 Feb 2012 15:50:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: Thomas Gray South Ca http://blog.heritage.org/2008/12/18/what-will-10-billion-get-you-a-lot-of-nuclear-energy/#comment-11564 Thomas Gray South Ca Mon, 22 Dec 2008 11:11:43 +0000 http://www.foundry.org/2008/12/18/what-will-10-billion-get-you-a-lot-of-nuclear-energy/#comment-11564 Coal is the only truly secure energy source we have here in the U.S.A. and should be an energy source to save for that purpose and not consume it or we lose that security. Anti energy activist are reeking havoc upon our electric energy suppliers and our electricity supply grid and unfortunately the goal of these very powerfull environgreensocialist league is to drive up the cost of electricity. With friends like these now soon in power in upper levels of government who needs enemies In order to save our coal we in reality must build nuclear power or we are all going to pay the piper much sooner as in oil cheap coal will end also. We need to stop exporting coal [ except for humanitarian purposes ect, ] NG, should be kept as a portfolio percentage of our overall energy supply according to it's price risk factor. NG is a major energy source for critical heat on the northern tier of the U.S. in the winter months. NG should NOT be used to produce electricity. Transportation, where possible mainly auto must go electric, Everybody wants clean air and no pollution energy supplies, you can't have your cake and eat it to, the byproducts of energy production is waste some usefull some not, my choice is nuclear to replace and save the coal and NG and oil. It is highly waste full and expensive to use electricity to heat homes and it is highly waste full and expensive to use NG to make electricity. IF you agree with me on these points, when you get a chance pass them along to the right people. Thanks, Thomas Gray. Coal is the only truly secure energy source we have here in the U.S.A. and should be an energy source to save for that purpose and not consume it or we lose that security. Anti energy activist are reeking havoc upon our electric energy suppliers and our electricity supply grid and unfortunately the goal of these very powerfull environgreensocialist league is to drive up the cost of electricity. With friends like these now soon in power in upper levels of government who needs enemies

In order to save our coal we in reality must build nuclear power or we are all going to pay the piper much sooner as in oil cheap coal will end also. We need to stop exporting coal [ except for humanitarian purposes ect, ] NG, should be kept as a portfolio percentage of our overall energy supply according to it's price risk factor. NG is a major energy source for critical heat on the northern tier of the U.S. in the winter months. NG should NOT be used to produce electricity.

Transportation, where possible mainly auto must go electric,

Everybody wants clean air and no pollution energy supplies, you can't have your cake and eat it to, the byproducts of energy production is waste some usefull some not, my choice is nuclear to replace and save the coal and NG and oil.

It is highly waste full and expensive to use electricity to heat homes and it is highly waste full and expensive to use NG to make electricity.

IF you agree with me on these points, when you get a chance pass them along to the right people. Thanks, Thomas Gray.

]]> By: Peter, Sydney Austra http://blog.heritage.org/2008/12/18/what-will-10-billion-get-you-a-lot-of-nuclear-energy/#comment-11497 Peter, Sydney Austra Fri, 19 Dec 2008 21:59:32 +0000 http://www.foundry.org/2008/12/18/what-will-10-billion-get-you-a-lot-of-nuclear-energy/#comment-11497 I would have thought a gigawatt would supply more than 100,000 homes. It works out to 10KW per home. Given that most home vary there electricity usage through the day & I would have thought it would be more like 2KW per home Currently homes in China use less electicity than Western homes - but they may reach our per capita usage during the lifetime of the reactors Peter I would have thought a gigawatt would supply more than 100,000 homes. It works out to 10KW per home. Given that most home vary there electricity usage through the day & I would have thought it would be more like 2KW per home

Currently homes in China use less electicity than Western homes – but they may reach our per capita usage during the lifetime of the reactors

Peter

]]> By: Barb -mn http://blog.heritage.org/2008/12/18/what-will-10-billion-get-you-a-lot-of-nuclear-energy/#comment-11338 Barb -mn Thu, 18 Dec 2008 16:28:52 +0000 http://www.foundry.org/2008/12/18/what-will-10-billion-get-you-a-lot-of-nuclear-energy/#comment-11338 That's right. Government doesn't have a right. Nor do they have the right to speak for the people. They're stepping over the line daily and no one is stopping them! They want us in a desperate position to take us over. When do we move in? That's right. Government doesn't have a right. Nor do they have the right to speak for the people. They're stepping over the line daily and no one is stopping them! They want us in a desperate position to take us over. When do we move in?

]]>