Nuclear project is foolish

  • Follow Letters

We just heard the cost estimate for those new nuclear plants: $14.5 billion. I think that means more like $21 billion in our so-called “real” world.

How much is $21 billion? That’s what Apple was worth a few short years ago. Now it’s worth $450 billion.

Think about it: $21 billion for one power plant in northeast Georgia? How could the investors ever recoup that? It won’t even come online – that is, begin to make money back for those investors – until 2016 at the earliest.

We’d get 2,000 permanent jobs for all that money, we’re told. Those jobs would cost us all only $10 million plus $500,000 per job. Obviously, nobody who works there will be getting paid even $500,000, let alone that $10 million. Meanwhile, this project is being sold to us as a terrific job-creator. Insert your favorite barnyard epithet here.

I’d prefer that Southern Co. just give every Georgian $2,100 right now. In the end, it comes to the same cost. But my plan has this additional advantage: It would actually work to create new jobs in our area.

Or try this on for size: Let’s pay Apple to relocate right here.

From Apple’s annual report; “As of Sept. 29, 2007, the Company had approximately 21,600 full-time equivalent employees and an additional 2,100 temporary equivalent employees and contractors.” Remember, that’s from back when Apple was worth about $21 billion.

Newt Gingrich was widely criticized for his $55 billion plan to put a colony on the moon. This monstrosity is comparable to that fiasco. Besides, it’s not as though Georgia doesn’t have a huge coastline, suitable for both wind and tidal power.

A plant we don’t really need? For $21 billion dollars? Plus, operating expenses lasting 100,000 years? Brilliant. Positively brilliant. Who thought this one up?

In the end, all I can say is: Good luck, Southern Co. Just remember: It’s not allowed to charge its customers for building costs on this fiasco until it actually starts to generate power. That’s the law!

Sandy Untermyer

Appling

Comments (18) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
omnomnom
3964
Points
omnomnom 02/17/12 - 12:27 am
0
0
I'm having trouble

I'm having trouble understanding anything in this letter, save the last paragraph.

allhans
24954
Points
allhans 02/17/12 - 05:54 am
0
0
I hear Obama every day..maybe

I hear Obama every day..maybe just most days, saying invest in the future, spend money to grow much needed jobs. Now here comes someone saying, don't do that...
Boy, you can't please some people none of the time.

david jennings
625
Points
david jennings 02/17/12 - 06:00 am
0
0
Well yea, I guess it would be

Well yea, I guess it would be ok. I mean anyone can see what I'm trying to say, you know, like as long as I do yea I think it will.

wribbs
521
Points
wribbs 02/17/12 - 06:12 am
0
0
I'm not nearly as smart as

I'm not nearly as smart as the author of this letter, but I think the purpose of this plant is to generate electricity, not jobs.

ReleehwEoj
161
Points
ReleehwEoj 02/17/12 - 06:45 am
0
0
If I'm not mistaken ,we (GA

If I'm not mistaken ,we (GA Power customers) are being charged for this plant before it starts generating power.

bubbasauce
24260
Points
bubbasauce 02/17/12 - 07:20 am
0
0
Omnomnom, You are right, this

Omnomnom, You are right, this letter makes no sense what so ever. Sandy needs to do just a little bit of research before she makes comments like this.

Fundamental_Arminian
1871
Points
Fundamental_Arminian 02/17/12 - 09:05 am
0
0
According to Yahoo Finance,

According to Yahoo Finance, the Southern Co. (symbol SO) has a market cap of $38.51 billion.

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=SO+Key+Statistics

With reasonable financing, SO ought to be able to handle the $14.5 billion cost of these nuclear power plants. We need the electricity these plants can produce, especially since the current administration is hostile toward coal-fired plants. If there has been improper billing, there are ways to remedy that problem.

Meanwhile, the letter-writer ought to explain how she came up with the $21 billion price tag for the plants.

Bruno
780
Points
Bruno 02/17/12 - 09:22 am
0
0
This letter makes no sense.

This letter makes no sense. The author could have saved time by simply writing, "Imaginit!"

dichotomy
37606
Points
dichotomy 02/17/12 - 09:44 am
0
0
Another one who actually

Another one who actually believes you can power cities and industry by "wind and wave". Believe me, if wind and tidal power generation actually worked and cost the same, or less, than a nuclear power plant the power companies would be doing it already. Disregarding the fact that they don't provide enough power, the cost to provide an equivalent amount of electric power would be more. Not to mention the fact that the environmental weenies would surely crucify you for messing up the ocean's tidal environment if it was ever tried in commercially useable quantities. It's never been studied. And if you actually believe that coastal property owners are going to sit back and let you build those unsightly windmill farms all up and down the coast your are wrong there. Even the Kennedys fought wind turbines "in their front, or back, yard". Plus, I am certain wind turbines would be a huge environmental threat to birds in the area. So, if you like for your heat pump to come on when the thermostat clicks, I suggest that we bite the bullet and build the nuclear plant and many more like them. It and natural gas are the only things that will really work if you outlaw coal and have a Democrat regime that limits our oil supply. Hydroelectric works well but the greenie weenies won't let us build any more dams. It's kind of ironic that the greenie weenie environmentalists have forced us into depending on nuclear power for our future.

TParty
6004
Points
TParty 02/17/12 - 10:37 am
0
0
I'm all for the wind

I'm all for the wind turbines- and even the turbines that get power from the tides. I'm a person who is for green energy and taking care of the environment, conserving it. I don't see why we can't do that AND have the nuclear facility here. I don't understand what the letter writer is trying to get at. Is it not clear what the difference is between $55 Billion and the $21 Billion made up number? Or the difference between a moon base, and actually power in this region? Why would a moon base be compared to power? I just don't understand. But back to reality-

I've asked this in a handful of comments- does anyone know how this will affect our power bill when this thing comes online?

Jon Lester
2480
Points
Jon Lester 02/17/12 - 10:44 am
0
0
We don't really need Savannah
Unpublished

We don't really need Savannah River Site, either, but you'll never read that here, outside of comments.

allhans
24954
Points
allhans 02/17/12 - 12:52 pm
0
0
TParty..Did your bill go up

TParty..Did your bill go up when the original plant went on line? I wasn't in GA at the time.

bjphysics
36
Points
bjphysics 02/17/12 - 01:09 pm
0
0
Wind and Tidal power are not

Wind and Tidal power are not green.

TParty
6004
Points
TParty 02/17/12 - 01:10 pm
0
0
I've been in Augusta for a

I've been in Augusta for a little over a year- I have nothing to compare it too.

pete1194
0
Points
pete1194 02/17/12 - 02:10 pm
0
0
Northeart Georgia?..Geography

Northeart Georgia?..Geography lesson in need.

Bruno
780
Points
Bruno 02/17/12 - 02:39 pm
0
0
Wind and Tidal power are

Wind and Tidal power are considered green. http://news.discovery.com/tech/is-wind-power-green.html

But that doesn't seem to have much to do with the rambling nonsensical article from Untermyer.

Pu239
284
Points
Pu239 02/17/12 - 07:37 pm
0
0
Jon Lester....let's just
Unpublished

Jon Lester....let's just close SRS...you know, walk away just like Love Canal. (eyeroll)

bjphysics
36
Points
bjphysics 02/18/12 - 02:52 am
0
0
Bruno: “Wind and Tidal power

Bruno: “Wind and Tidal power are considered green.”

Yes in the pop literature and the purveyors of these technologies; however, conservation of energy dictates the kinetic energy that is converted into power represents a kinetic energy loss to the atmospheric/ocean system and the environmental impact of this is poorly understood.

The Law of Unintended Consequences comes to mind.

Solar thermal with albedo balance, implemented away from forested areas is a better bet.

Radwaste
420
Points
Radwaste 02/18/12 - 04:19 pm
0
0
Sandy? There's a VERY simple

Sandy?

There's a VERY simple solution if you don't want more power plants - of any kind:

Turn off your electricity.

The Stone Age! Now THERE'S the way to live!

sand gnat
685
Points
sand gnat 02/19/12 - 10:31 am
0
0
Put this cost in perspective.

Put this cost in perspective. It's about one day's spending under obummer.

Back to Top
loading...
Search Augusta jobs