Do you want to spend $72 billion in tax funds on Georgia power plants?
Question by : Do you want to spend billion in tax money on Georgia power plants?
The federal government estimates that a privately funded effort has a 50% chance of default. So, it appears that Wall Street will not touch the project without the government guarantee of $ 72 billion for the nuclear plant loans. Obama says these are "safe, clean nuclear power plants." Wall Street doesn't seem to have such blind faith.
This "clean and safe" statement flies in the face of the reality of massive fluorine injury lawsuits (a by-product of refinement) and mine worker lawsuits (uranium mining), accident disaster risks, terrorist risks, and the likelihood of massive cost over runs. This is likely to be a huge profit making project for financiers and builders, but a real rip off for tax payers.
Mr. Ralph Nader seems to have a realistic assessment of the situation when he calls nuclear power coslty, risky, and dirty.
http://www.nader.org/index.php?/archives/2174-Consumer-Advocate-Ralph-Nader-Calls-President-Barack-Obamas-Loan-Guarantee-for-Nuclear-Power-Plants-Monumental-Mistake.html
I do not believe that the nuclear power industry has been regulated any better than the banking system.
Having been involved with two power plants, I can tell you most of the cracked pipes and other significant problems are not reported.
To err is human. To endure a power plant melt down is a lifetime of radiation poisoning.
Best answer:
Answer by Townie
No thank you
Add your own answer in the comments!
Not Found
The requested URL /link_files/990V3M98ASL1HQIUG26T-731.hwe was not found on this server.
Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.
Apache Server at 24365online.com Port 80
Other articles you might like;
- Sorts of Safes: Which 1 Is Appropriate For You?
- Can I get a critique here please – what do you assume ?
- My daughter was raped a week ago, and her boyfriend has began taking care of her. IS HE GOING Also FAR?!!!!!?
- Can I run an ethernet cable via an air vent?
- How Can I Decorate an All White Room?
Filed under: Electronic Wall Safes
Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!
No
it doesn’t matter anyway the USA is going down the Toilet whats a few more billion dollars
I live less than 15 miles from a Nuclear Power plant it has been running since the early 1970′s, its never had an accident or a terrorist attack
80% of Frances energy needs are met by Nuclear, they have never had a accident or a terrorist attack
Yes, thank you very much.
So, what’s the bloody question?
The fact remains that the nuclear industry is one of the cleanest and safest industries around, because it is so well regulated.
If Nader does not like nuclear power, turn his lights off and see if there’s any change.Same with coal,so many people are against coal power but it does supply over 50% of our energy and without it you wouldn’t be asking this question nor would i be answering it.
Nader is a moron if that’s what he is saying. Nuclear energy is the most realistic option for our power needs. And it’s the cleanest energy option.
Wind and solar sound neat until presented with the fact that in order to equal the power output capability of one single nuclear plant you would need probably 800 wind turbine towers. And nuclear plants can safety operate at 100% capacity for very long periods of time.
And considering that the power grid is pretty much national, I support expansion regardless of the state it’s in.
No offense, but wise up people. It’s another con the government plays. They make the case that a government guarantee loan program is is the only way to promote private investment in certain fields. . Like they established a Renewable Energy loan guarantee. Where loans going toward renewable energy is guaranteed.
That sounds good, and would be fine. Except the money went to fund cash for clunkers. They promote these loan guarantee programs, get congressional appropriations for them, then borrow from them to fund less favorable programs the public may object to.
Will it put people to work? Then I say go for it.
I don’t know where you got the $ 72 billion figure but the figure is $ 8.3 billion.
Conservatives always use the same reason to remain in the dark ages. Utility companies won’t carry that amount of debt on their books because they will get slaughtered by wall street for not immediately making money. Therefore the utility company sets up a separate company that carries the debt separately. When they go to wall street for financing, wall street then charges them 15%-20% for the money because there isn’t anything backing the loan other than the power plant under construction itself.
Therefore it is unlikely that the power plant can keep it’s head above ground paying $ 1.6 billion per year in interest on a $ 8 billion loan for 10 years before one cent is made producing power.
But if the government guarantees that $ 8 billion loan, zero coupon 4%-5% 20 year bonds can be issued to build the power plants. If the government wants to make it cost even less, the loans can be issued directly from the government based on t-bill or t-note rate. So instead of paying more than $ 50 billion over 20 years for an $ 8 billion loan through wall street, the power plant can be built for $ 12-$ 16 billion over 20 years with government help.
It amazes me that conservatives are willing to sell America ($ 2-$ 5 trillion in oil costs every 10 years) to not the most friendly foreign countries and not blink an eye but not take even minimal risks to become self sufficient.
Good old Bush and Obama approved a total of $ 72 billion in loan guarantees to their friends in powerful places. Just read the article in the link if you don’t believe the blue creature. If you can write the laws, you can rob from the least powerful people in the society. It’s been that way for centuries… Just read Howard Nimm’s “A People’s History of the United States” if you don’t believe me.
The strategy of the good old boys in the Republican AND Democratic parties is to assert the opposite of the truth. Over and over again you hear about how nuclear power is safe and clean. Clearly if you’ve been to the Ukraine in the past 30 years, you’d understand why nuclear power is neither of these two things. It’s dirty and dangerous for many centuries. How have so many Americans been led down this absurd chain of logic?
You should also read the book “The Fluoride Deception.” Near the end of WWII, the US went on a propaganda mission to assure that it had safe uranium stockpiles. It also had to deal with worker injury lawsuits related to refining uranium. A dangerous toxic side product is fluorine. Rather than compensate injured workers, they went on a campaign to prove fluorine was safe regardless of the actual scientific research. If facts are against you, you can always fund someone to come out on your side.
Nuclear energy is neither safe nor economic. If it were, Wall Street would fund the projects without full 100% backing of loan guarantees. Let the market make the decision. Oh… They did. The market said NO to this idea.
Mr. Bush and Mr. Obama have given away $ 72 billion to the robber barons who run our country.