Vermont reactor closing signals death knell for aging nukes; What replaces them?

Published September 02, 2013 FoxNews

Five nuclear reactors have been shuttered in the United States in recent months -- signaling a “rapid-fire” industry retreat in 2013 that will only get worse, according to a recent study. The closures are not the only sign of a death knell, writes Matt Cooper of the Institute for Energy and the Environment, who points out that expansion projects were recently canceled at several other reactors and that 38 U.S. reactors also are at risk for early retirement. Copper, an economic analyst with the Maryland-based institute, says the decline is the result of several factors, including nuclear power’s inability to compete with alternative energy sources and a sharp decline in demand as a result of the increased efficiency of electricity-consuming devices. “What we are seeing today is nothing less than the rapid-fire downsizing of nuclear power in the United States. It is important to recognize that the tough times the U.S. nuclear power industry faces today are only going to get worse,” Cooper writes in his study, Competition Pushes Aging U.S. Nuclear Reactor to the Brink of Economic Abandonment.”….. To Read More….

My Take – I find this truly amazing.  I can remember when I was a youngster and nuclear energy was being touted by all the big scientists of the day, it was claimed electricity would be so inexpensive they wouldn't even meter it.   Whew....Prediction....especially about the future...... is really hard isn't it.

Truthfully, I never really liked nuclear for three reasons, one of which I have dismissed.   Nuclear is too complicated and too fragile! I don’t have as many concerns about nuclear waste as I used to and I also believe they will find a way to harvest that waste at some point.

But the really important point that everyone must think about is this. Hydro-electric and wind power can’t possibly be the reason for all of this. Hydro power is minimal all through the nation and what we have is [given the green movement’s ability to stop dams from being built and having others torn down] most likely close to what we had when they built these plants. So that seems to be a fallacious argument to me.

As for wind energy; that is only competitive when it is subsidized and will eventually be far too expensive, far too damaging to the environment and abandoned just as it was after the Carter years. It’s the inevitability factor, which is when reality reaches its apex. It's unfortunate that people have to get stupid all over again before they get smart again. Because this time educating the public will have cost the taxpayers a massive fortune wasted on stupid greenie ideas that we know from past history will not work. That leaves coal and natural gas. Coal plants are being shut down, or will be shut down soon, by new air quality standards adopted by the EPA at an alarming rate, so that can’t possibly be the reason.

That leaves natural gas, and the cost of maintenance. That is what I believe is behind this whole thing. Vermont reactor closing signals death knell for aging nukes; What replaces them?Current nukes are too old, too expensive to rebuild, too expensive to maintain, too expensive to build new, too complicated, too fragile and natural gas has now become a game changer! Thank goodness for fraking! But the greenies are against that also.

What exactly are they for anyway?