In introducing the "American Power Act" on May 12, 2010, Senators John Kerry (D-MA) and Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) seemed oblivious to the various public relations disasters the industries favored in their bill had suffered in recent weeks. In short order, we have witnessed: an explosion at a Massey coal mine in West Virginia, in which 29 workers were killed; BP's unfolding oil catastrophe, wherein 11 workers were killed in what is proving to be the worst offshore oil industry disaster in U.S. history in the Gulf of Mexico; and the contamination of the groundwater supply of much of southern New Jersey by a tritium leak from the aging Oyster Creek nuclear power plant.
Unabashed, the two senators took to the podium accompanied by nuclear and coal industry titans (though nary an oil exec in sight) to introduce draft legislation that subsidizes nuclear power, "clean" coal (an oxymoron, if there ever was one), and incentivizes states' support for offshore oil drilling, while gutting the EPA's authority to regulate carbon dioxide emissions as pollutants under the Clean Air Act.
In addition, despite an Interpol investigation into organized crime's involvement in forest carbon offsets and massive tax fraud in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, Senator Kerry promised the bill would provide "additional carbon offsets". Do we really need more than the 2 billion tons of carbon offsets per year already provided under the House-passed Waxman-Markey bill? The U.S. Government Accountability Office studied carbon offsets and found them impossible to verify. This quantity of carbon offsets means the U.S. could make no verifiable emissions reductions until at least 2030, making the 17 percent cuts in greenhouse gas emissions below 2005 levels promised by 2020 meaningless in the short-term-- when it's needed most.
We can and indeed we must do better.
Follow Daphne Wysham on Twitter: www.twitter.com/daphnewysham
Brendan DeMelle: New Footage of BP's Failed Containment Dome Effort (VIDEO)
More footage was released today from the Deepwater Disaster, providing an indication of the powerful streams of oil gushing into the Gulf of Mexico.
". . .and the contamination of the groundwater supply of much of southern New Jersey by a tritium leak from the aging Oyster Creek nuclear power plant."
I did some searching and found no reports of any measurable contamination in any groundwater in New Jersey that is not directly under a licensed and operating nuclear power plant. There were two identified leaks resulting in the escape of about 180,000 gallons of almost pure water containing a small quantity of tritium nearly a year ago, but there is no indication that the leaks have continued or that there is any damage to the environment. Nuclear fission is the only alternative to fossil fuel if we want reliable, affordable energy. It has a better safety and environmental record that should provide optimism, not grounds for attack.
1) AP on the tritium leak.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jrD4xonSoPnaXaZTftwd4RXuoA2gD9FI7LJ80
2) Dr. Arjun Makhijani on how to get the U.S. to zero CO2 without nukes by 2050: carbonfreenuclearfree.org
I used to spend months at a time sealed up inside submarines powered by a nuclear power plant that was never more than 200 feet from my location. I spent 40 months as the Engineer Officer of one of those ships and was responsible for the training and qualification of a team of about 40 sailors and officers. I have reviewed medical records for radiation workers.
I would greatly prefer spending the next 40 years getting off of coal, oil and natural gas and moving towards reliable, emission free power supplied by fissioning uranium, plutonium and thorium. It would be difficult to power automobiles with nuclear energy, but the vast majority of our energy demands can be supplied at a lower cost, with greater reliability and with far greater environmental safety from fission.
Direct experience and many years worth of education and training far outweigh what I can read at the links you provided.
Rod Adams.
Publisher, Atomic Insights
Host and producer, The Atomic Show Podcast
I forgot to directly address the information in the link on the tritium leak. As I stated in my first post, there is no indication of any contamination in groundwater that is not directly under a licensed and operating nuclear power plant. Here is a quote from the article that you linked to:
"The tritium leaked from underground pipes at the plant on April 9, 2009, and has been slowly spreading underground at 1 to 3 feet a day. At the current rate, it would be 14 or 15 years before the tainted water reaches the nearest private or commercial drinking water wells about two miles away."
The farthest that the leak could have spread at the rate mentioned above is about 1000 feet, which is still inside of the plant boundaries. If it takes 15-15 years to reach the nearest private or commercial drinking water wells, the specific activity will have been reduced by a factor of at least 4, (half life of tritium is about 6 years). There will also have been a considerable amount of dilution as new water entered into the plume.
The total amount of tritium leaked is probably less than one curie, which is roughly the weight of a grain of a small aspirin tablet that has been split into 3850 pieces. That is why the concentration is measured in picocuries. (1 x 10^-12).
My suggested age limit 100 yrs may be wrong as these vehicles become too bent on Bottom Line than "DO NO HARM". Maybe 70 years is better, but I wanted 25% of our College grads to work on the BOD and in senior management for skill set training for when they become entrepreneurs. What better way to start companies that actually make products that progresses humanity forward and gets us off oil, coal, or nuclear waste > WMD pollutents=war. Off rfid tracking food, or other products geared to supporting existing corporate greed, instead of testing food (like our diabetes machines), histofiles (show: birth, life, death video of your product b4 purchase). Off the Round-Up=GMO tit of Monsanto. Off sustainable Diabetes, Cancers, Cholesteral drugs =Big Pharma.
2.) Set all campaign budgets for Congressman, Senators, President & the public foots the bill. Eliminates corp contributions, profit Lobbyists. Those elected are by the people. All have equal AIR time in Debates or Ads, are auditable, cannot win if they didn't balance their budget.
3.) $100 tax rebate if you VOTE.
Would you like to talk about how this new "bill" will create the next economic bubble?
Carbon credits — a booming trillion dollar market that barely even exists yet, but will if the Democratic Party's plan to push into existence a groundbreaking new commodities bubble, disguised as an "environmental plan," called cap-and-trade.
The new carbon credit market is a virtual repeat of the commodities-market casino that's been kind to Goldman, except it has one wrinkle: If the plan goes forward as expected, the rise in prices will be government-mandated
If the bill passes, there will be limits for coal plants, utilities, natural-gas distributors and numerous other industries on the amount of carbon emissions they can produce per year. If the companies go over their allotment, they will be able to buy "allocations" or credits from other companies that have managed to produce fewer emissions. President Obama conservatively estimates that about $646 billion worth of carbon credits will be auctioned in the first seven years;
The feature of this plan that has special appeal to speculators is that the "cap" on carbon will be continually lowered by the government, which means that carbon credits will become more and more scarce with each passing year. Which means that this is a brand new commodities market where the main commodity to be traded is guaranteed to rise in price over time. The volume of this new market will be upwards of a trillion dollars annually.
Democrats have opposed any new leases for exploration and drilling for over two decades until this administration.
Do the Obama enablers here actually believe there is no connection between obama being the largest receiver of money from BP , Obama pal Tony Podesta (who ran PA for Obama in the general) lobbying the White House for the company and their overly friendly attitude towards this historic polluter and big oil in general? Really?
Really...
They cant even pretend anymore about this being a "progressive" administration.
I know for a FACT that Joe Biden is heartbroken over the inclusion of drilling in this bill - (hes been a champ on fighting drilling off our Delaware coast) but what can he do?
If you dont believe me - look what Ted Kaufman says about this overturning of the ban. Ted is Joe remember...
Daphne what can we do to fight this sell out and horror of a bill? Will there be an organized push back? Puleeze tell me yes...please, please, please...
The price on CO2 will only change the price of coal generated electricity by $0.012 per kWh and the price of gasoline by $0.12 per gallon. This is much less than the underlying price volatility from our conventional energy providers.
It isn't a strong enough price to justify removing the EPA's ability to regulate CO2.
It isn't a strong enough price to justify a $2B subsidy for clean coal.
It isn't a strong enough price to justify a $5B subsidy for nuclear.
It isn't a strong enough price to justify payments of 37.5% of federal revenue from oil drilling to states that approve offshore oil drilling. I guess payments like this do not count as bribes if they are written into law.
Interestingly, there do not appear to be any similar subsidies for renewable energy in this bill.
The Kerry / Lieberman bill also leaves out the excellent provisions from the Markey / Waxman bill that strengthen our building codes. Buildings consume over 40% of our energy in the US and any bill that does not address this issue will not achieve the long term goals of 80% CO2 reductions.
It is these building code standards that would provide much of the green job growth promised by Markey / Waxman.
The subsidies for nuclear energy aren't direct payments, but loan guarantees. Their not free either, the guarantees cost plant builders a fee and they have to have committed costumers for the electricity to qualify for the guarantee (this reduces risk to the tax payer)
What's wrong with a bill for energy companies? The product they provide helps maintain our society. I can't imagine living in a country with frequent black-outs and high voltage surges. The gasoline I buy is a bargain at twice the price and with the exception of when there's a strong thunderstorm, my electricity is there 24/7 and all I have to do is write a check once a month.