Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Hearings Set on Building Reactor ( Maryland )
wasingtonpost.com ^ | August 3, 2008 | Christy Goodman

Posted on 08/02/2008 7:58:57 AM PDT by kellynla

The Maryland Public Service Commission is holding several public meetings this month, beginning tomorrow, about whether a third reactor should be built at the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant in Lusby.

The reactor could double the power-generating capacity of the Calvert County plant. Clearing the regulatory hurdles is a multiyear process, and construction is not expected to begin before late 2009.

UniStar Nuclear Energy, a joint venture between Constellation Energy and EDF, a European energy group, filed an application in November with the Public Service Commission for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity, a license given to a public utility by a state regulatory agency to build.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; US: Maryland
KEYWORDS: energy; nuclear; nuclearpower

1 posted on 08/02/2008 7:58:58 AM PDT by kellynla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: kellynla

“Clearing the regulatory hurdles is a multiyear process”

And therein lies the issue... This is preposterous. Far too much needless redtape blocking substantive development on a wide variety of fronts, not just energy.

But, this multiyear process lies squarely at the feet of the Tree Huggers, the DhimmiRats, and the EnviroWhackos, IMO.


2 posted on 08/02/2008 8:14:31 AM PDT by PubliusMM (RKBA; a matter of fact, not opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

PEBBLE BED REACTOR BUMP!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_bed_reactor


3 posted on 08/02/2008 8:44:52 AM PDT by Dick Bachert (PE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kellynla
The proposed reactor has won the support of Gov. Martin O'Malley (D) and the Calvert County Board of County Commissioners, major steps in the nearly six-year federal, state and local application processes.

This is the same problem I addressed in that article you posted yesterday. The delays in this process are unacceptable.

Why should it take six years, just to get this project off the ground? Agencies should coordinate their efforts so that approval would take no more than a year.

As for those who don't like nuclear, they can stuff it!

4 posted on 08/02/2008 8:45:09 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (I'm a non Soros non lefitst supporting maverick Gang of 1, who won't be voting for McCain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PubliusMM

PEBBLE BED REACTOR BUMP!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_bed_reactor


5 posted on 08/02/2008 8:45:10 AM PDT by Dick Bachert (PE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Why should it take six years, just to get this project off the ground?

Six years is long enough for one generation of protesters to get tired and another to come of age and get motivated.

It's a process designed for failure.

6 posted on 08/02/2008 8:59:20 AM PDT by SteamShovel (Global Warming, the New Patriotism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SteamShovel

It’s also time enough for some nut job to find a dirt microbe that is only located on the construction site. Tack on another five years while the courts try to figure that one out.

If our government had been in place around Plymouth Rock, the pilgrims would never have been permission to land. “Oh well, er ah, we need to run an environmental impact study. Just hang on there for three years...”


7 posted on 08/02/2008 9:04:01 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (I'm a non Soros non lefitst supporting maverick Gang of 1, who won't be voting for McCain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: All
I swear I'll keep saying this till I'm blue in the face: If the US Navy can put a nuclear reactor on something as small as a fast attack submarine and do so since the 1950's, there is NO reason why we can't have more nuclear power across this great nation!
8 posted on 08/02/2008 11:25:20 AM PDT by Severa (I can't take this stress anymore...quick, get me a marker to sniff....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: PubliusMM
Actually, I'm no ecowhacko. But I do have to question the wisdom of building a nuclear reactor on an actively eroding coast. There is a reason there are Cliffs at Calvert Cliffs, that being active erosion.

Build the reactor somewhere inland where the ground is less likely to wash away, and far enough away the LNG facility down the Bay does not pose a hazard.

9 posted on 08/02/2008 3:31:14 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kellynla; Abundy; Albion Wilde; AlwaysFree; AnnaSASsyFR; bayliving; BFM; cindy-true-supporter; ...

GO NUKES!

Maryland “Freak State” PING!


10 posted on 08/02/2008 5:23:57 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Drill Here! Drill Now! Pay Less! Sign the petition at http://www.americansolutions.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kellynla; gate2wire
I live in a one bedroom apartment in Catonsville and my electric bill last month was $150 without much AC.

Build the damn reactor.

11 posted on 08/02/2008 5:30:46 PM PDT by Vision (The light of the body is the eye, if your eye is true all your body will be full of light. Matt 6:22)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson