Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Progress postpones nuclear plant plan

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
bananas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-01-07 10:35 AM
Original message
Progress postpones nuclear plant plan
http://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2007/05/28/daily24.html

Progress postpones nuclear plant plan
Triangle Business Journal - 4:52 PM EDT Wednesday, May 30, 2007

Progress Energy is delaying the construction on a potential new reactor at the Shearon Harris power plant by at least two years, the company said Wednesday.

If the Raleigh utility decides to build an extra reactor at the Harris site in Wake County - a choice that hasn't yet been made - the reactor will not come online until at least 2018. That's two years later than originally planned.

Instead, the company said it hopes to displace 2,000 megawatts of power generation - equivalent to the capacity of several plants - by boosting efficiency and reducing energy use. It said it would do so by "greening" existing and new facilities, asking commercial and industrial customers to reduce energy use, and offering a series of programs through which residential customers can cut use.

Progress also will not propose any new coal plants in the next two years, it said.

<snip>

The company's announcement comes on the heels of a similar declaration by Duke Energy, the Charlotte-based utility that provides service to much of the western Triangle. Duke announced earlier this month an efficiency plan that it hopes will offset about 1,700 megawatts of power.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Massacure Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-01-07 10:33 PM
Response to Original message
1. Efficiency is always a good thing. But if I have to choose, i'd pick nuclear over coal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NickB79 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-03-07 03:07 PM
Response to Original message
2. So, the status quo of coal remains then?
I think it's great that they're saving energy through conservation, but this is the usual "picking the low-hanging fruit" scenario. You get the easy energy savings first, but from there on out it becomes much more challenging to conserve anyways near the amount conserved in the first round of utilities greening, as you now have to start reaching for the higher-hanging "fruits". It only gets harder from here on out.

While this plan will reduce the per-person amount of fossil-fueled electricity consumed by the area residents, it doesn't reduce the TOTAL amount of fossil fuels burned. The energy conservation plan is to provide power to the 25,000-30,000 NEW residents expected to live in the area over the next decade. No coal or natural gas fueled power plants will be closed by this plan, and in case you still haven't understood the seriousness of the situation we're in, we need to CUT greenhouse gas emissions by at least 50% in the next few decades to prevent catastrophic disaster. Simply maintaining the current status quo of 75% of our electricity generated by coal or natural gas will KILL us.

Why not enact the conservation measures to save several thousand MW's of power, AND build nuclear reactors to replace coal-fired plants?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 12:15 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC