We saw a presentation on this topic a couple of weeks ago, and one of the things that struck me that I wasn’t aware of is the water contamination that is already happening in Texas due to uranium mining. I didn’t know there was uranium mining going on in Texas. Check out this San Antonio Current article about Goliad County.

It’s easy to just accept what we hear when we are told that nuclear power is “clean”, which only takes into account the air pollution of the plant operations. But when you find out more about the mining, and the fact that we still don’t have a place to store all the hazardous waste that we’re passing down for hundreds of thousands of years. How can anyone call that clean? I’m convinced that we can do better.

Thanks for the great piece. I’d like to address the concerns expressed by other writers here.

The transmission line issue for wind is being resolved, withadditional transmssion recently approved by the Texas legislature. There is still a large way to go in developing wind in Texas. We are rich in sun and wind.

Solar breakthroughs are underway, and concentrating collectors and thin film solar are about to make solar power more affordable and available. Heliovolt, here in Austin, is manufacturing the equipment for producing thin film solar, which will eliminate the heavy panels and make solar more cheaply and easily installed.

The state isn’t accounting for some of the efficiency measures we have in place when calculating the energy needs of Texas. Volunteer programs are not counted at all. For example, over 66,000 people in Austin are participating in Austin Energy’s Energy Partners program. They allow the city to adjust thermostats remotely to lower peak demand, which is the real energy crunch that we have.

We have a lot of ground to be gained through combined heat and power as well, capturing the waste heat from our buildings and utilizing it.

Peak demand can be met with efficiency, by using renewable energy and by improving building codes to reduce demand. Gas plants can be used effectively to meet peak demand, and there are a lot of new ones that are much cleaner than the old gas plants. They start up and shut down quickly. are like a sports car. while the baseload plants, nuclear and coal, are meant to be run around the clock, and are slow to start up. They typically aren’t shut down unless absolutely necessary.

If we can find better ways to meet air conditioning needs on hot August afternoons we can avoid coal plants and nuclear plants - with their huge expenses and their pollution.

While some tout nuclear plants as a solution to global warming, they’re not tge solution. They take years to license and build, and would divert billions of dollars that would easily solve our energy needs through would efficiency and renewable resources. Huge amounts of carbon dioxide are released in mining uranium, which has risen 10 times in cost recently since there’s not enough of it readily available. Transportion and construction carbon emissions are also huge. Granted, when a nuclear plant is up and operating, there aren’t carbon emissions, but scientists are saying that we must act now and significantly reduce carbon emissions in the next ten years. The best way to do that is to use the technologies we already have, measures that work and are affordable, sustainable and reliable, and that don’t produce nuclear waste as a byproduct that threatens generations to come.

As to price, nuclear plants look affordable when utilities hold up the data about the costs of running a plant that is already operating. When construction costs are included, the picture looks different. If cost overruns for the proposed nuclear plants were to go six times over budget, like they did for STNP 1 and 2, we could be looking at costs of nearly $40 billion, or more.

We don’t need coal or nuclear plants. We need to continue to press forward with affordable and clean energy sources that don’t risk our health or economy.

Karen

We don’t want coal because it’s dirty, else extremely expensive and still ‘dirty’ for a ‘clean coal plant’, despite Texas being the ‘Saudi Arabia of Coal’.

We don’t want nuclear because it’s dirty. With Austin’s population projected to double by 2020, and the recent TXU buyout leading to the cancellation of 7 or 8 new energy plants… We will be in an energy shortage sooner rather than later.

Nuclear in my opinion is the best option we have if we want energy to be reasonably priced and cleaner than many alternatives.

I was in Austin when we voted for the STNP. I was about 21. I’m 55 now. We’ve learned a lot since then about how to build nuclear plants.

And in all that time more people died in Ted Kennedy’s car than have died in American nuclear plants.

If it were not for these groups, the kill rate would be much higher.

However, having TLAC in an optimum location is still of upmost importance. The rescue groups are limited in the amount of animals they can take in, and the adoption rate depends on a group effort between all of these organizations.