Survey: Americans Not Warming Up to Nuclear Power

[jpak]

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/060531/phw044.html?.v=47

Survey: Americans Not Warming Up to Nuclear Power as Solution to Energy Crisis and Climate Change

WASHINGTON, May 31 /PRNewswire/ -- Despite a major sales push by the Bush Administration and the electrical utility industry, nuclear power is viewed in a deeply skeptical way by a "strong and strikingly bipartisan majority" of Americans, according to a major new Opinion Research Corporation (ORC) survey released today by the Civil Society Institute, a nonpartisan and nonprofit think tank that has conducted extensive public opinion research into the attitude of Americans about energy-related issues. According to the survey, Americans favor developing clean renewable energy alternatives and strategies -- including increased conservation, solar energy and wind power -- that can be delivered more rapidly than nuclear power.

ADVERTISEMENTThe new CSI survey found that more than three out of five Americans (61 percent) say the nation can't "afford to wait ... to put in place part of the solution to the energy crisis and global warming" if "building more nuclear power plants will take a decade or more in the U.S. and cost tens of billions of dollars." Only a third said the U.S. could wait for more nuclear power plants to come on-line as a way to dealing with today's energy and climate woes.

A key survey finding: Politics does not seem to be a factor when it comes to supporting or opposing nuclear power and other energy alternatives. A nearly identical 60 percent of conservatives, 62 percent of independents and 68 percent of liberals agree with the 61 percent of Americans who think the nation can't afford the wait and expense associated with erecting more nuclear power plants. (However, the Bush Administration and other pro-nuclear lobbyists may have friends in nonvoters, of whom 47 percent are unconcerned about the build-out timeline and cost issues associated with more nuclear power, compared to the 63 percent of voters who are.)

Another illustration of the strikingly bipartisan nature of the views of Americans on nuclear power: Only 9 percent of conservatives, 8 percent of independents and 5 percent of liberals say they have "no concerns about increased U.S. reliance on nuclear power."

<more>

[unhappycamper]

1. Those "We bring good thing to life" folks (GE) will be firing up

their media stations to 'educate' us about the goodness of nuke power plants.

[dysfunctional press]

2. ...can't afford the wait or the expense...?

"...to put in place part of the solution to the energy crisis and global warming" if "building more nuclear power plants will take a decade or more in the U.S. and cost tens of billions of dollars." Only a third said the U.S. could wait for more nuclear power plants to come on-line as a way to dealing with today's energy and climate woes...A nearly identical 60 percent of conservatives, 62 percent of independents and 68 percent of liberals agree with the 61 percent of Americans who think the nation can't afford the wait and expense associated with erecting more nuclear power plants..."

okay- for those people who don't feel we can afford to wait the amount of time it would take to build nuke plants and get them online- what do you propose to pick up the slack in the future, then?
there's NO answer that's going to be ready to take over from petroleum tomorrow...or even the next day- if we nix an idea because it'll take a decade to get it online- 10 years from now we'll be saying coulda, woulda, shoulda, while sitting in the dark.

[soothsayer]

3. better sitting in the dark than glowing in the dark

[dysfunctional press]

4. scare tactics always work best on the un/underinformed.

big oil strikes again.

[JohnWxy]

8. You can acheive quite a bit with designing in more efficiency in buildings

and electrical appliances and you also can build wind power capacity faster than you can build nuclear plants. And wind power is far cheaper than nuclear. Actually, wind power is the cheapest technology available for the generation of electric power. And of course there is no CO2 emmissions or toxic waste to take care of for 14,000 years.


http://www.awea.org/pubs/factsheets.html

[dcfirefighter]

10. How long would it take to build

a wind farm that produces at least 1600 MW 90% of the time?

California currently has, statewide, 2000 MW of capacity, with a capacity factor of less than 5% (according to http://www.awea.org/projects/california.html). This capacity has been developed over 25 years, to generate 2760 M kWh a year.

During that same period, nuclear generation in california has gone from 5000M kWh to over 35000M kWh, an increase of 30,000 M kWh, or 10 times faster than wind, in the real world.

[JohnWxy]

11. installled capacity 2005: 2,500 megawatts, expect 3,000 in 2006

http://www.awea.org/news/US_Wind_Industry_Ends_Most_Productive_Year_012406.html

"The U.S. wind energy industry easily broke earlier annual installed capacity records in 2005, installing nearly 2,500 megawatts (MW) or over $3 billion worth of new generating equipment in 22 states, according to the Washington, D.C.-based American Wind Energy Association (AWEA). Instead of the slow year that has previously followed boom years for the industry, 2006 is expected to be even bigger, with installations topping 3,000 MW."


These figures would have been higher but the orders for wind turbines are coming in faster than the manufacturers can fill them.

This kind of growth can go on for many years. Economical power storage systems exist that can enable constant supply of power. (VRB Power in Canadna).

[Massacure]

12. 5% average loading of 3000 is 150 megawatts average.

How much does energy storage add to the cost of wind power? We shouldn't leave that as an externality.

[One_Life_To_Give]

5. Solution = Backstroke

Once Manhatten goes under, we won't need all them evil nuke plants!

[ramapo]

6. Few understand how bad coal is....

Everybody knows what can happen if a nuke plant goes bad. Few understand the insidious problems resulting from our massive use of coal.

[NickB79]

7. We're also still buying SUV's and can't find our own country on a globe

Americans aren't the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree, so to speak.

[WyoBlueDog]

9. The Problem...

I think the problem is, when politicians talk of nuclear power, they don't specify. The dangers associated with nuclear power is before my time, so there's not quite the stigma with my generation, but it needs to be further defined. Just what are we going to use nuclear power for? If it is indeed safer than in years gone by, we need the proof. And then I'm all for it.