Skip to Content

Support MinnPost

rolf westgard

rolf westgard's picture
st Paul, MN
Commenter for
5 years 37 weeks

Recent Comments

Posted on 06/02/14 at 01:33 pm in response to U.S. should reconsider nuclear power

US electric demand has been stable at about 3800 billion kwh since 2004. Transportation fuel demand is also stable to slightly down. This is the result of high fuel prices and resulting conservation efforts in transportation, building efficiency, etc. That energy demand stability is also evident in other OECD countries. This is not true in the developing world, especially in China, Indonesia, India, etc. where demand continues upward.
Fossil fuels and the binding energy in the...

Posted on 06/02/14 at 01:48 pm in response to U.S. should reconsider nuclear power

Our 102 nuclear reactors have operated safely for decades. 3 Mile Island made a billion dollar mess of the central reactor, but nobody was injured. Short of avoiding the San Andreas Fault you could put a new reactor any place there is enough water.
Dept of energy is actually supporting the new small modular reactors. Several private groups are doing the same including one which includes Bill Gates. Those units are essentially commercial versions of the 50-100MW units that are on our...

Posted on 06/02/14 at 04:47 pm in response to U.S. should reconsider nuclear power

Paul is right on here.

Posted on 06/03/14 at 12:42 pm in response to U.S. should reconsider nuclear power

A 20 year OSHA survey rated nuclear power the safest of all US industrial activity.

Posted on 06/03/14 at 12:45 pm in response to U.S. should reconsider nuclear power

Try running a city during a quiet night with no wind or solar. Every traffic light, every hospital, every factory, every home goes dark. Good for health tho, as everyone who lives in a high rise gets good stair climbing exercise.

Posted on 06/05/14 at 03:11 am in response to U.S. should reconsider nuclear power

to talk science to the few people who don't grasp the reality of E=MC2. I'll stay with the more than 600 readers who like my article.

Posted on 06/05/14 at 03:10 am in response to U.S. should reconsider nuclear power

We don't really know the consequences of returning CO2 concentrations to the levels of the distant past.That is why I get splinters. REW

Posted on 06/05/14 at 10:05 am in response to U.S. should reconsider nuclear power

In the US plants like the AP 1000 run about $5-6 billion each.The Chinese are building them for half that.
An AP 1000 will produce upwards of 500 billion kwh over 60 years which is about a penny per kwh for the plant.
Fuel cost for a nuke is about .6 cents per kwh.
Once built they are low cost to operate in part because of their 90% capacity factor.

Posted on 06/08/14 at 04:13 am in response to U.S. should reconsider nuclear power

Control room testing on the AP 1000 at Sanmen China is complete, and the reactor will be operational in 2014, not 2016. Three more AP 1000s will be operational in China in 2015.
Nuclear energy is high density, reliable, and continuous. It is the low emission future.

Posted on 06/08/14 at 04:28 am in response to U.S. should reconsider nuclear power

As I write this(5 AM Sunday) it is dark and there is no wind. Thousands of heavily subsidized MN solar and wind devices produce nothing.
Yet all over the cities traffic lights function, hospitals have power as do water delivery and purification systems. No one in a high rise is trapped without elevators. Machinery which needs power at a steady voltage continues to hum.
Because down river at Prairie Island four giant turbines are turning 60 times/second, providing billions of...