Back in the 1950s, we only thouht about one thing when we designed a technological marvel. How it worked and how much it cost to build. We didn't consider:
1. Safety of the General Public.
2. Safety of the Operators.
3. The Envronmental.
4. Cost of Disposal.
In the past 50 years, we have learned a lot of hard lessons:
1. We really don't want to kill and maim our friends and neighbors.
2. If we poison the evironment, we eventually poison ourselves and our children.
3. We have to pay for getting rid of things, now: Burying it doesn't work any more.
So when we evaluate a power technology, we must consider the costs and evironmental impact of the entire life cycle, not just building the power generation technology. This includes both the life cycle of the generation technolocy and the fuel it consumes (if any). This includes all the operating costs, including insurance.
It also goes to say that when evaluating any technology, that any government subsidies for that technology are part of the cost (even if the person or organization building the power facility doesn't bear the costs).
Herbie Robinson, BSEE, Cornell, 1974.
There have been a lot posts recently about nuclear power. A lot of people have the knee jerk reaction that all nuclear power is simply too dangerous. I mean after all, if the insurance companies won't offer liability insurance for it... But that's not really true. Let me describe my nuclear reactor.
1. it has already been built.
2. It is delivering 36000 Terawatt hours of power to the United States every day. That is 6200 times the projected yearly electricity demands in 2030.
3. The power is really free -- all we have to do is capture it.
In case you are wondering, what I am talking about is the sun.
I have been working a shorter term energy plan for encouraging the reduction of petroleum consumption. The goal was to come up with something that isn't super controversial that could be passed quickly. It's a 20 page report located here: http://herbrobinson.us/EnergyPlan.pdf. The biggest portion is an incentive program for PHEVs; so, it goes well with longer term renewable energy power generation efforts.
In case anybody is wondering, I am an EE (Cornell, 1974).
It's even more rare that we have a candidate who showed the kind of courage and leadership one expects from a president by voting against the war when it was a very unpopular thing to do.
It's been at least half a century since we have seen a candidate that has that kind of proven integrity and good judgement to go with it.
That's why this is the first primary I have ever worked on.
