I am working on a new site nuclearpowerdanger.com I have created some radioactive plume maps based solely on wind. Working on more specific map methodology.

http://www.nuclearpowerdanger.com/plume-maps/site…

These are existing plumes of radiation caused by "normal" releases.

My methodology is outlined here

http://www.nuclearpowerdanger.com/plume-maps/meth…

Jorn

I haven't suggested installing any energy sources that haven't been invented yet, but I do think at a time when we need more electricity we should use all available sources. We still have a lot of coal. We shouldn't be tearing down hydro-electric dams. Gas is still abundant (we have lots of wells being drilled right in the DFW area). Wind turbines are popping up all over the two states where I have lived (Texas and Minnesota), so I know they exist – albeit with limitations on their dependability. There are other sources (e.g. solar, geothermal and biofuels) that could make small but significant contributions if the playing field were level.

There are also changes that could be made to slow the growth of demand such a peak load pricing. This would cause consumers to shift the time of their usage, and make better use of existing power plants. I don't want to take Comanche Peak off line either, look at what I wrote, but I don't think it's a good idea to spend 20 billion on the two new proposed reactors.

If nuclear proponents want to convince the public to start building again they first need to eliminate the ban on reprocessing and open up the Yucca mountain facility that would hold the existing nuclear waste.

it's like a mental plague that is consuming sanity.

He is making us lose money and is destroying our country . please help !!!!

Even Obama is better than him

NUCLEAR ENERGY NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Finally, paying solar producers of electricity the same price as the utility is insane. When I send the utility a dollar they spend a large chunk (don't have the figures but believe it was 50% or more) maintaining the grid, and more on other infrastructure costs. Only a small percentage paid for the variable cost of generating that electricity. When you get a dollar for PV generated kWh's none of that goes to maintain the grid. Consider on that day when everyone has enough solar on their roofs to generate all their electricity. So they sell enough electricity to the utility during the day to pay for the electricity they use at night. Their net bill from the utitlity is 0. But the utility will still need to maintain virtually the same generating capacity, and still fix all the lines after the ice storm, etc. but with 0 revenues. A lot of what's pictured for renewables *only* works if they are a tiny fraction of the total capacity, and really begin to break down if they become significant.

The reality is, is that intermittent sources will drastically drive up prices, won't displace much generating capacity (though they may idle it) and the net result will be that brownouts and blackouts will probably become the norm, and reliable electricity will be viewed as an unsustainable luxury only that bad non-earth conscious generation could have afforded.

What you and others are saying is nonsensical, you are saying install a electric energy source that has not been invented yet,

and these activist are interfering with our current electric grid to the point that it may soon fail,

in any event as we lose our current nuclear power plants electricity is going to become very expensive

Although I concede that the nukes have operated more safely than I could have imagined thirty years ago, I still am amazed that fellow free market conservatives are in favor of these huge centrally planned projects. Since when do conservatives favor emulating the Russians, French and Swedes in economic and energy policy.

Also, it isn't a question of finding one cure all source. Wind is great for extending our supply of fossil fuels, but it isn't very good at being part of the peak load base. We should be developing lots of 5-10 percent solutions and incorporating them into the grid.

There are a lot of reasons to complain about forced wind energy, but this report certainly doesn't list them.

wait that sounds like the Washington elect.