Thread: State of the Union

Originally Posted by DOMS

But you can say "goodbye" with them.

well at least a mushroom cloud.. it might be good with steaks...the mushrooms...

Originally Posted by DOMS

That's just it, I'm not talking about mass amounts (plus it's not as bad as current waste). Read up on it.

Not being a prick here, but since you seem claim to know a decent amount about the nuclear energy market....


How do maintain profitability? I"m not even close to knowing much about nuclear tech, but I have read many publications about the industries struggles to reach a profit, at any time. Its a very very high cost process that requires heavy subsidy from the gov't (something France is willing to do).

Originally Posted by lnvanry

Not being a prick here, but since you seem claim to know a decent amount about the nuclear energy market....


How do maintain profitability? I"m not even close to knowing much about nuclear tech, but I have read many publications about the industries struggles to reach a profit, at any time. Its a very very high cost process that requires heavy subsidy from the gov't (something France is willing to do).

From here: Nuclear Economics | Economics of Nuclear Power | Nuclear Costs

• Nuclear power is cost competitive with other forms of electricity generation, except where there is direct access to low-cost fossil fuels.
• Fuel costs for nuclear plants are a minor proportion of total generating costs, though capital costs are greater than those for coal-fired plants and much greater than those for gas-fired plants.
• In assessing the economics of nuclear power, decommissioning and waste disposal costs are taken into account.

Nothing that I've read (and I read a lot) leads me to believe that nuclear plants in the US need to be subsidized. The French do it because of their own, internal, economic factors.

But I'll consider it anyway. If the options are using fossil fuels or subsidized nuclear energy, which would you pick?

Also, nuclear tech, just like almost every other technology, will get cheaper the more that we use and develop it. Refinements in technology, streamlined manufacturing processes, and such will bring down the price.

Another thing to consider is that when most people compare the cost of a nuclear plant to a coal burning plant, it's not done apples to apples. The comparison is a clean running nuclear plant vs. a highly polluting coal plant. When you compare nuclear plants to a modernized, cleaner (but not as clean as a nuclear plant) coal burning plants, the cost savings of the coal plants shrink a lot. I watched an interview with the CEO of one of the largest coal plant businesses (I forget the name) where he said that they'd only built one "clean" plant because it's considered too expensive. He went on to say that it wasn't cost prohibitive. He said the problem was that people just didn't want to pay more--by any amount.

And that's what it comes down to: are we willing to pay more? The biggest proponents of "being green", Al Gore and Bono aren't, so do you think that the unwashed masses are really willing to?

Nuclear power isn't going to be as cheap at natural gas or dirty coal burning plants, but it won't cause a monstrous jump in prices, either.

For the record, yes I would be willing to pay a bit more if: 1) It helped to clean up the environment. 2) Made the USA more self-reliant. 3) Ruined OPECs asshole.

Originally Posted by DaMayor

ATOMIC ALBOB, AKA CAPTAIN CLEANUP!

Goddamnit, I thought I pulled all those pics I sent my misstress when we were sexting each other.

Well I'm in here a little late but I think he is a great speaker but he is the face of the new brand. David Axelrod, Ram Emanuel and Larry Summers in part are the ones you have to worry about. These guys, in my opinion, are sociopaths and will sell any policy for political and personal gain. Axelrod is the Chicago Political machine, Emanuel is the Washington version of a Mob enforcer and Summers was very much for continuation of the policies that lead to bundling bad securities with good that lead, in part, to the economic melt down recently. Obama is the new kid on the block and he is getting really bad advice as far as the country's well being. Personally, I think he wants to do the right thing but he is hemmed in by sycophants and sociopaths.

Originally Posted by DaMayor

He wants to blow us all to hell. Mushroom clouds everywhere, three headed babies, talking fish....

I knew that supersized mini-me look he was sporting foreshadowed something....damn it!

I'm going to TAKE OVER THE WORLD!!!

Originally Posted by Glycomann

Well I'm in here a little late but I think he is a great speaker but he is the face of the new brand. David Axelrod, Ram Emanuel and Larry Summers in part are the ones you have to worry about. These guys, in my opinion, are sociopaths and will sell any policy for political and personal gain. .................the economic melt down recently. Obama is the new kid on the block and he is getting really bad advice as far as the country's well being. Personally, I think he wants to do the right thing but he is hemmed in by sycophants and sociopaths.

In many ways Obama is a continuation of the same.

Washington insider you note: Summers, Geithner, Emanual.

the secret bailout for AIG derivatives. Goldman Sachs magically is "strong" again making profits, and dishing out bonuses - thanks to the average working stiff, whose money is taken out of his & her paycheck and sent to Washington.

Obama is catering to the Miltiary Industrial-Complex, perhaps because he has too.

And the other side, there is the emergence of what I call the "God, Gun & Flag" movement that seems to be alienated - well, who isn't alienated, right now.

Originally Posted by Big Smoothy

In many ways Obama is a continuation of the same.

Washington insider you note: Summers, Geithner, Emanual.

the secret bailout for AIG derivatives. Goldman Sachs magically is "strong" again making profits, and dishing out bonuses - thanks to the average working stiff, whose money is taken out of his & her paycheck and sent to Washington.

Obama is catering to the Miltiary Industrial-Complex, perhaps because he has too.

And the other side, there is the emergence of what I call the "God, Gun & Flag" movement that seems to be alienated - well, who isn't alienated, right now.

Are you aware of how many programs he and Gates have cut or drastically reduced? LCS, KEI, F-22, JSF, Presidential Helo, DDG 100 Zumwalt, C-17 ....just a couple billion+ programs. He's cutting programs left and right, while Congress continues to fund them and tell the DoD they are authorized to spend for them. Congressional members (dem and repub) are afraid of there districts losing thousands of jobs, which have already begun at LMT and BA....so they will vote to fund them and when the people get mad for losing their jobs, Congress has deployed a nice little Cover Your Ass defense and can blame the DoD/White House.

Originally Posted by lnvanry

Are you aware of how many programs he and Gates have cut or drastically reduced? LCS, KEI, F-22, JSF, Presidential Helo, DDG 100 Zumwalt, C-17 ....just a couple billion+ programs. He's cutting programs left and right, while Congress continues to fund them and tell the DoD they are authorized to spend for them. Congressional members (dem and repub) are afraid of there districts losing thousands of jobs, which have already begun at LMT and BA....so they will vote to fund them and when the people get mad for losing their jobs, Congress has deployed a nice little Cover Your Ass defense and can blame the DoD/White House.

Ivanry,

thanks for the info, as you're in the MIC industry.

Obama cuts, then Congressman in certain districts say, DoD is authorized to spend.

Thank you for this info and the specifics. I want to learn more.

Any periodicals, websites, about the details of the MIC industry?


TIA.

Originally Posted by Big Smoothy

Ivanry,

thanks for the info, as you're in the MIC industry.

Obama cuts, then Congressman in certain districts say, DoD is authorized to spend.

Thank you for this info and the specifics. I want to learn more.

Any periodicals, websites, about the details of the MIC industry?


TIA.

There are public domain sources that cover a good chunk of the news (Janes Defence, Defense Industry Daily, Forecast International, AMI International) AMI is daily read for me since I currently work with naval defense. I think these site require paid memberships though...as far as $$$ and volume details go, that usually doesn't make it to open source until the DoD says so.

On second though DID might have open access...not 100% sure though. Our memberships are corp wide so I've never had login before. I've found the best way to learn is just to ask some one...internet research only gets you so far when dealing with this subject.