Posted on 08/18/2005 9:13:19 AM PDT by AFPhys
As the price of oil surges, so has support for building nuclear power plants in the United States. The latest Rasmussen Reports survey finds that Americans support the nuclear power option by a more than 2-to-1 margin (55% to 24%).
In June, before the latest surge in oil prices, the country was more evenly divided on that question--44% in favor and 35% opposed. Much of the growth in support for nuclear power plants can be found among women and Democrats. However, men and Republicans remain even more supportive.
Eighty-seven percent (87%) of Americans believe it is somewhat or very important for the U.S. to reduce its reliance on imported oil. That's essentially unchanged from the earlier survey.
Also unchanged is the belief that energy conservation is not a lasting solution. Sixty-four percent (64%) say that, in the long run, developing new sources of energy is more important than conserving energy. Just 26% take the opposite view.
Sixty-four percent (64%) of men and 46% of women say it is "time for the United States to begin building power plants again." Twenty-two percent of men and 25% of women take the opposite view. Earlier in the summer, a plurality of women were opposed to building new nuclear power plants.
A similar shift has occurred among Democrats. By a 52% to 26% margin, members of Howard Dean's party support building more nuclear power plants. In the previous survey, a plurality of Democrats were opposed.
Republicans support building new nuclear power plants by a 63% to 18% margin.
Sixty-nine percent (69%) of Republicans believe developing new energy sources is more important than conserving energy. That view is shared by 59% of Democrats and 64% of unaffiliateds.
Rising oil prices have depressed consumer confidence. This may be the reason that more people are willing to support more nuclear power plants in the United States.
Demographic details available for Premium Members.
Rasmussen Reports is an electronic publishing firm specializing in the collection, publication, and distribution of public opinion polling information.
Rasmussen Reports was the nation's most accurate polling firm during the Presidential election and the only one to project both Bush and Kerry's vote total within half a percentage point of the actual outcome.
During Election 2004, RasmussenReports.com was also the top-ranked public opinion research site on the web. We had twice as many visitors as our nearest competitor and nearly as many as all competitors combined.
Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports, has been an independent pollster for more than a decade
Apples and oranges.
I've had a home in Orange County for 16 years and I wouldn't object to a Nuke plant...
just give me one of those Geiger counters... LOL
"I work in the power industry and can tell you that if we began designing a new nuke in the USA today, it most likely wouldn't go on line for 7-10 years later. This is due to the extreme amount of documentation and the permitting processes associated with this kind of work. Or to put it another way, government RED TAPE."
Therein lies the biggest problem faced by anyone who wants to license a new nuclear plant. It wouldn't surprize me one bit to see it take twice that long, once the Sierra Club's inevitable lawsuits start to be filed, and you gotta know that they and others will sue over any nuke plant.
In the meantime, we have what we've got for the next decade or two, with slow progress on permitting the new plants.
Sorry to sound skeptical, but the realities are pretty grim.
That $3 gas could be $2.50 in the blink of an eye if our great Congress would put action where their big fat mouths are and drop the Federal Excise Taxes on gasoline!!
LILCO built one about 20 years ago... it was never fired up. Envrinmental whackos prevented it. So there's a brandy-new nuke plant that's just gathering dust.
I worked at Stone & Webster back in the late '70's. LILCO was a hot item back then...
That would be good too;o)
if Edison had any BA**S they would be expanding San Onfre. I'll take a case if Iodine pills.
I know. People think the same in oil exploration, production, refining, and distribution logistics.
Typical mindset is as follows: "Hey Martha, they started drilling off the coast of CA, FL and in ANWR. Let's go fill up the mini-van this week-end when they start pumping!"
And, the fact that it takes YEARS and BILLIONS of dollars to build a REFINERY. Too many folks think you can just drive up to an oil well and "fill er up."
I know nothing about nuke plants but isn't San Onofre older than dirt??
I used to live down there(San Clemente) and I think? they had problems even in the 70's...
BUMP!
Think water supply, energy management, highway system, railroads (transportation), local roads, parks; the list goes on and on...
Economy of scale?
WTF is that?
reactor #1 was started up in 1968 and is now decomissioned
2 is operating I think 3 is down for a electrical problem, I know that new generators/pumps are to be installed soon.
Yes, and it is the world's most effective demonstration as to why no nuclear power plant (at least US ones) can't "go boom like an atom bomb". The nuclear fuel itself is designed specifically to prevent it.
But the BEST is a combination of both. Take a few hundred square miles of remote desert---build a bunch of breeder reactors there on a grid pattern, then fill the remaining area up with solar generation. Use the power from both to generate hydrogen, and more fissionable fuel to ship to burner reactors around the country.
I don't know zip about nukes either, I would ass-u-me that
with replacement parts except the reactor the plant could run for a long time, I am not sure how long they can function,number 1 ran for 25yrs. I just check the edison web site for info. about 2,3 but there was not a lot there
"....build a bunch of breeder reactors there on a grid pattern, then fill the remaining area up with solar generation. Use the power from both to generate hydrogen, and more fissionable fuel to ship to burner reactors around the country."
Careful now, Warthog --- pretty soon it'll be too cheap to meter!
The major players in the power industry better get all over this like white on rice. They shouldn't wait for the government. They need to rachet up the plans and get them ready to be submitted to whatever local authorities need them. If and when the enviro-wackos come after them, then they can go to the government for whatever assistance it can give them.
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.