Quote:
Originally Posted by benebob
My facts are straight. If you read it and comprehend it then you'll understand that the last reactor (which was at an already open plant) came online in 96. No new facilities have been started since 79. Just additional reactors at existing sites which is by far the easiest way to do get approval (heck even a Democrat approved the last one!) but I was talking about new plants as most of these new reactors at existing sites are there to eventually replace the aging reactors there thus not in effect increasing the amount of nuke power available.
Sorry, I don't do fuzzy math.
|
You blame Bush but there has been more action during his administration than any of the last 20 years. You need to read the Bush Administration comprehensive energy plan that the Democrats would not pass. It is actually a well balanced and realistic plan.
Tell me the FIVE applications you are talking about to include company and date submitted. 
Oh, and while you are at it, check out the New York State lawsuits in process to fight approval of at least one of the plant expansions.
I think you need to do some more research and maybe even improve your comprehension of what is written.
A good starting point.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/nuclear.../reactsum.html
Unlike you, I am a bit more realistic in my assessment. There HAS been a lot more action in the nuclear area during the Bush administration, but much of it is not because of him. Many factors have resulted in this activity to include administration support, higher fossil fuel costs, global warming considerations, more efficient and safer designs, and public acceptance/recognition that more nuclear power is required.
Again--get real.
Lee