Getting Consumers to Pay Now for Nukes Later

Submitted by Bob Burton on

Georgia Power, a subsidiary of the energy utility Southern Power, has mounted an intensive lobbying campaign for legislation that would allow it to bill customers now for as much as $2 billion of the $14 billion price tag of two new nuclear reactors proposed for the Vogtle power station. The utility, notes Associated Press reporter Shannon McCaffrey, has employed five lobbyists, used its four in-house lobbyists, and paid for meals for the House Republican leadership, House Democrats and the executive committee of the Georgia Legislative Black Caucus. McCaffrey's article was published in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution the day before it published an opinion column by former Greenpeace activist turned PR consultant Patrick Moore. Moore, who enthusiastically championed Georgia Power's case, was simply described as the "co-chairman of the Clean and Safe Energy Coalition'' which supports "increased use of nuclear energy." The paper didn't disclose that the coalition was created and is funded by the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), and that Georgia Power is one of NEI's members (pdf).

Main Source: 
Associated Press, February 23, 2009
Topics: 
Nuclear Power
Third Party Technique
Lobbying

Comments

Anonymous replied on

It take a special kind of jackass to build nuclear plants at all, and an even more idiotic moron to do it in sun-soaked Georgia. Do you really think the world's supply of uranium is infinite? Did G d whisper in your Bible-Belt ear that it was OK to create spent nuclear fuel for his world? Do you really believe men will continue to die in uranium mines to keep your ass fat? Did you know the worst kind of multi-national criminals have a monopoly on the uranium mines of the world and currently "fix" its price just like OPEC and the Saudis have for oil in America? Didn't you see the battery car, a natural ballast for Solar and Wind energy coming? Do you simply ignore, or not believe your own countries Scientists SEE: There is as much wind power potential (900,000 megawatts) off our coasts as the current capacity of all power plants in the United States combined, according to a new report entitled, A Framework for Offshore Wind Energy Development in the United States, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy, Massachusetts Technology Collaborative, and General Electric. http://www.capecodtoday.com/news246.htm01/01/09
And remember:
If the U.S. had chosen to be a moral people, and leaving Iraqi oil alone, and following Al Gore, decided to develop the South Western deserts, with the technology of the times - solar/thermal-molten sodium - electricity installations, for the same amount of money as that war cost, ($650 Billion), today, we would be tapping into the largest, renewable, sustainable, PERPETUAL, energy source the world has ever known. It would have paid every energy bill in the U.S.A. for maintenance fees only - FOREVER! It would be equivalent to an oil field that can NEVER run dry! Low cost electric power, and storeable hydrogen gasoline replacement from the electricity, for all!
After the millions of murders, and $650 billions of dollars, borrowed from our children’s futures and pissed away, with thousands of our own and others maimed and disfigured for life, millions of families utterly destroyed, ours and theirs, we are no closer to Iraqi oil production than the Iraqis are!
The next time you hear a blithering idiot spoiled brat, drunken, drug addicted, sociopath, rich Arabic saber dancing daddie’s boy oilman, stand at a microphone and threaten YOUR safety with someone ELSE’S weapons, remember what you lost America, remember, and weep! (also see http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=a-solar-grand-plan)http://www.technologyreview.com/microsites/spain/solar/p6.aspx
http://www.itsgood4.us/biodiesel.htm

Anonymous replied on

No rational person in a rational debate about anything behaves the way this person has. Without bothering to argue the facts, the previous poster should seek counseling.

Mutternich replied on

That "unhinged" comment and your oh-so-rational reply are both signed "anonymous." How do I know you didn't write both of them?

Diane Farsetta replied on

The [http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/stories/2009/02/23/nuke_states.html Atlanta Journal-Constitution] reports that Florida -- which is "among several Southern states that Georgia Power and its legislative backers have pointed to as reason to pass Senate Bill 31 in Georgia" -- is trying to get rid of its nuclear pre-financing measure:

In the past two weeks, Florida Republicans, including the state Senate president pro tem, drafted two bills aimed at a 2006 law requiring power customers to pay early for new nuclear reactors.

The bills are a reaction to public outrage, after those nuclear fees had an unexpectedly expensive and politically disastrous debut this winter.

One power company’s customers saw already spiking bills go up an extra 11 percent due to the nuclear fee.

Anonymous replied on

..in their pre-construction costs, because then consumers would REALLY be mad at their new bills!
Actually, since the nuclear waste turns into salt water taffy, it's a win-win for all!

Seriously, how can they NOT include the cost of storing the waste for thousands of years in the cost of these plants? I would think the cost per kilowatt hour would not be so economical if they were being honest.
But then again, they're not being honest about the safety aspects either, so I guess that I shouldn't expect anything different.