When I was a kid in the 70’s, everybody listened to KGON, the local FM rock station, and it was avowedly liberal: pro-pot, anti-Nixon, anti-war, with a great cast of hippie-ish DJ’s that became like family. As Archie and Edith wistfully sang, “Those Were the Days.” They had a feature in the morning, “Nukes in the News,” which poked fun at the near-daily shutdowns, cost overruns, and other problems that always plagued that particular branch of corporate welfare, and this was before Three Mile Island and “The China Syndrome.” Somehow, back then people understood, and it was uncontroversial to say on the airwaves, that Nixon was a crook, drug laws were stupid, wars were pointless disasters, and nuclear power was about the dumbest idea anybody ever thought of. All these things are of course still true today, but few in our media understand this, and fewer recognize that the fact that such plain truths are still contested, much less denied, is a searing indictment of the way these bozos have screwed up doing their jobs over the last few decades.
President Obama announced recently that part of our efforts to combat global warming would be to “invest” in “new” nuclear power. This cuckoo idea has been a favorite of such “liberal” rags as the NYT and WaPoo, and of course involves large corporations scooping up copious amounts of taxpayer dough, so it’s the sort of idea any politician might find attractive. But honestly, just because the media was born yesterday doesn’t mean actual Americans were, and will never support nuclear power in their communities, and all it will take is the first plant going up amid protests and doubling and trebling of its budget that this idea will slither into the swamps from which it emerged, along with the reputations of the feckless politicians who supported it.
Forty years of nuclear power fiascoes has taught us a number of things, President Obama, so please take note:
1) The private market will never risk its money on nuclear power, owing to the 50% default rate and ruinous risks.
2) There is still no permanent place to store waste that will remain toxic for 100,000 years.
3) There will be accidents, given the appalling safety record of the industry, and
4) There is ZERO public support for this demented waste of money.
Those who would forget history are doomed to repeat it, and too bad Obama didn’t listen to KGON. Whenever government takes a big leap into nuclear power , it always turns out the same, just ask the bonkers former Republican governor of Washington, Dixy Lee Ray (KGON called her Risky Delay). This outspoken anti-environmentalist plunged her state into a decade-long financial and public relations disaster with her wanton embrace of the aptly named WPPSS (Washington Public Power Supply System), which set out to build seven nuclear plants based on wildly overstated demand projections; only one ever went briefly online, and the rest were mothballed, abandoned, or aborted after Bechtel and the like made off with billions in state funds.
This time, the giveaway is even more flagrant, since the federal government is proposing to take on all the risk without even participating in any of the potential upside like Dixy did; whatever fake “profits” the corporate welfare queen, in this case Southern Companies, makes by overcharging its customers for “new” nuclear power it will get to keep to buy lead-lined private planes, US Senators, and such. Ain’t bipartisanship grand?
Had KGON not long ago been bought out by Clear Channel and vanished into prerecorded obscurity, they would undoubtedly be dusting off “Nukes in the News.”



22 Comments







You should send this idea to some enviro groups. It sounds hilarious and I bet someone might take up the cause.
There’s never any shortage of disasters… Our Trojan nuclear plant was finally imploded by its Enron-connected owner, PGE, after 30 years of shutdowns and other opera bouffe, for which the ratepayers paid, natch.
One thing I keep hearing from the Right is, France has nuclear power and it’s great! And here I thought they hated all things French. Not if they can get a talking point from them they don’t. But here’s the problem. The waste. Right now it’s a small problem in France, but it will only get bigger and it won’t go away. I picture some third world Dictator suddenly coming up with the idea that his country will be the dumping ground for everybody elses nuclear waste. Problem solved! He’ll get rich and who cares about his little third world country anyway. They’re poor, they deserve whatever they get. Ah, progress.
Funny you should mention that… my favorite righty troll at my blog quickly responded with the “French” argument, if you want to call it that. What I’ve heard is that nuclear power across Europe is in trouble because the rivers are getting too warm.
Yes, in the summer time in France they cannot always run at full capacity.
But the French aren’t really concerned about closing up shop during a summer heat wave. Should we be?
France has one design for all their plants so you get economies of scale on parts also as far as safety goes plant inspections are much easier if every plant has the same layout. Also if they find a problem in one plant they know to check the other plants for similar problems which reduces potential accidents we had many nuclear designs so no cost savings no safety net of sameness.
I heard France was having some cost problems though with their plants.
Also the nuclear industry I believe wants 5 different designs for plants so we still won’t get as much cost savings as France does however the new plants will be cheaper than the older more varied plants we used to make.
They should consider thorium as a bridge solution, until greener solutions are able to come online in the proper scale. Thorium is only a 100 year storage problem.
Anyway, the dumbest (yet most likely) course of action would be to keep relicensing our creeky old reactors.
At least in Vermont, that isn’t happening, but we’ll see. More likely is “new” plants, which conveniently require “new” money.
Yes, but at least money is merely a political problem rather than a scientific, economic or environmental challenge.
I really don’t want to wait till more reactors start having problems like up in Vermont. I want the old reactors shut down. If that means building a new reactors then so be it. At least they’d be modern and not crumbling relics.
Waste from nuclear power plants is a small problem in every country that has them. The French nuclear power industry is a little smaller and about half as long-established as the American one, so there is a lot more waste in the USA. http://www.nukeworker.com/pictures/displayimage-5205-fullsize.html shows the Yankee Rowe plant’s cache of it. The plant is, I guess, long gone but that 100-foot row of casks is still there.
The reason they stay is the federal government’s conflict of interest. The fuel in them is ash-choked after only about 5 percent of it burned, but even that small fractional burnup meant oil that would have filled a tank 875 feet wide and 540 feet high was not burned, and all the air it would have consumed remained breathable. And uranium doesn’t just replace fuel that takes up a lot more space. It replaces fuel that costs a lot more, with much of the lost oil income being lost by government.
So KGON was lying to pay the rent.
Small problem? I guess it depends on what your definition of “small” is. All of the nuclear plants in my region turned out to be oversold wastes, but maybe that’s just coincidence.
Well, I think that it’s colossally dumb for the government to spend any money on this. If Nukes were so dandy, Wall Street would be all over them, and it’s not. Solar, wind, and geothermal all have actual investors and don’t require taxpayers to shoulder appalling risks and the insoluble waste problem.
50%!!! do you have a link if you can get one then this diary should be front paged Not that I have any pull to make that happen.
It’s widely known; I’ve heard it a dozen places, and I’ve personally witnessed a failure rate higher than that here.
Focus on that piece of information next diary. No banks in this economy want to loan anybody money. Somebody with a 50% default rate wants a loan chaaa yeah right!
I’m too inept to post links, but teh google, when asked about “nuclear power default,” tells the WPPSS story even more vividly than I have here, and there are dozens of similar stories.
Then get a front pager to explain it to you or a mod ask for help ok sorry I’m not the guy to help lurking mod this is your job please!
Wind costs 9.1 cents per kilowatt hour vs 10.5 cents for nuclear I’m reading this information from the Zoltec 2009 stock report so it may be biased.
I wonder if cost of storage was included? I’m positive cost of a clean up after an accident was not added in.
Zoltec makes carbon fiber for the best wind blades.
Fossil fuel is a sure global disaster. Nukes are possible local disasters. Wind and sunshine don’t store very well. Hmmmm.
Yes, that’s the thing. Lack of clean alternatives which can be immediately scaled up to replace fossil fuel. I think some form of nuclear is going to have to be part of a bridging solution toward clean energy.
One thing about nuclear, it doesn’t fit into a free market model very well. As ThingsComeUndone mentioned, France doesn’t run it’s nuclear industry as an “anything goes” free market.
I don’t consider antinuclear viewpoints to be liberal viewpoints. If this equivalence has been generally accepted, it must have forced a lot of would-be liberal voters to hold their nose and vote right.
Good post, as always. For all the alleged benefits of nuclear power, there’s just too many problems, issues and negatives, not the least of which is the waste. Whenever I hear nuclear power being touted as “clean” energy, I just want to puke. Just the other day, I heard some jerk touting how anyone could have lived right in the heart of the power plant at 3 Mile Island, and nothing would have harmed them. Well, we really don’t know that, do we?
As stated, France has a very different approach to their power plants, for better or for worse, and for all the conservative praise of the frogs on this issue, you have to know that we’re not going to see something similar here, not by a long shot. I agree completely with the notion that, as per usual, many have their hands out for the big rip-off, and citizens are left holding the bill and the waste with likely little to show for it.
For all of the inherent issues with “green” energies, more research and funding should go into those concepts to see what else can be done. Barking up the nuclear power tree is madness.
And yes, I remember the “good old days” (and now I feel like a reverse version of Archie & Edith), when liberal viewpoints were actually acceptable on some of the media & people actually listened to them!! But as we well know, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, Pat Robertson, Doug Coe, Lee Atwater, Jabba Ailes & all that putrid gang put paid to that, esp when they gave US citizenship to the dreaded pirate Murdoch.