Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

TexasTowelie

(112,453 posts)
Tue Apr 16, 2019, 11:20 AM Apr 2019

Subsidies are in the spotlight as fossil fuel industries hammer proposed Pennsylvania nuclear deal

Advocates for Pennsylvania’s influential natural gas and coal industries laid into the nuclear industry during a Monday hearing on Pennsylvania’s proposed nuclear deal that would treat the industry’s five plants like solar, wind, and other alternative energy producers.

Speaking to the House Consumer Affairs Committee, Rachel Gleason — executive director of the Pennsylvania Coal Alliance — said that “never once … has the coal industry come to the General Assembly to request a ratepayer funded subsidy” despite the closing of coal plants in the state.

She added that a proposal by Rep. Tom Mehaffie, R-Dauphin, would continue to tip the scales in favor of renewables and away from coal and other fossil fuels.

David Spigelmyer, head of the powerful Marcellus Shale Coalition, echoed Gleason in his testimony, calling for legislators to oppose any “subsidization” or “bailout” of the nuclear industry.

Read more: https://www.penncapital-star.com/energy-environment/subsidies-are-in-the-spotlight-as-fossil-fuel-industries-hammer-proposed-nuclear-deal/

2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Subsidies are in the spotlight as fossil fuel industries hammer proposed Pennsylvania nuclear deal (Original Post) TexasTowelie Apr 2019 OP
Nuclear of course has other dangers, but it's minimally polluting esp. compared to coal mr_lebowski Apr 2019 #1
Reportedly all but one of PA's nuclear plants are profitable DeminPennswoods Apr 2019 #2
 

mr_lebowski

(33,643 posts)
1. Nuclear of course has other dangers, but it's minimally polluting esp. compared to coal
Tue Apr 16, 2019, 11:36 AM
Apr 2019

We need to keep Nukes in the mix until such time as we're able to scale up the other alternatives. It's also very useful as a 24/7 source of power for times when wind isn't blowing/sun isn't out/etc. We need to properly prioritize climate change at this point, and nukes essentially ARE 'alternative energy' in the sense of not producing CO2.

Big Coal may not have shown up asking for state subsidies (no idea if that's true) but they get MASSIVE subsidies from society simply by not having to pay for the health and climate change effects of their poisoning of humanity and the natural world.

Sorry but f*** the coal industry, let it DIE afaic. The huge Whale Oil industry died quite a while ago, and society survived. Lotta people worked in the Steam Engine industry too.

DeminPennswoods

(15,290 posts)
2. Reportedly all but one of PA's nuclear plants are profitable
Wed Apr 17, 2019, 07:30 AM
Apr 2019

There is no need to subsidize them.

IMO, this entire legislation is for the benefit of First Energy's Bruce Mansfield nuclear plant that is slated for closure. Ironically, it's not far from the new Shell cracker plant that will absorb any laid off plant employees and then some.

Latest Discussions»Region Forums»Pennsylvania»Subsidies are in the spot...