Balta1701

Sigh

Grand Detour

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Feb 2, 2010 -> 05:28 PM) I know it's possible to get a loan but I don't think it's the right time in my life to take that plunge. Keep doing these sorts of events and you can count it as free marketing in the event that you ever do decide to take that plunge.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Feb 2, 2010 -> 05:27 PM) Let's get some more funding for global warming studies. Frankly, it's your side that thinks we need more study about whether or not its happening. My side thinks we should have done something to start fixing it 12 years ago

Wanna see Favre's ankle?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 2, 2010 -> 01:08 PM) From what I've seen you've really overstated the cost of those San Antonio plants. It ranges from $13-17B total, not per reactor. Wind and solar generation isn't cheap, either, and currently costs a lot more than nuclear generation. Please show me where renewables are typically beating nuclear prices. Make sure subsidies for both sources are factored in. And factor in the fact that you still need backups for wind and solar because they're not reliable sources of energy. You're correct, it was total, not per reactor. My mistake. I have no ability to actually factor in subsidies here, and there's actually a key reason; a lot of the politics here involves casually not telling people how much things are costing. If I go straight to cost per Kilowatt, Right now, Nuclear Power is somewhere in the $8000/kilowatt range. This number is consistent with the San Antonio plants as currently described. Problem is...it keeps going up. About 3 years ago, the head of one energy company said he doubted that any new nuclear capacity would be installed before 2020 because of the cost...which he estimated at $4000/Kw. For similar examples, there's been estimates produced of the cost per kilowatt for plants in Florida. A most recent quote was in the $14 billion range, which translated to $6600/kilowatt. But that didnt' count building distribution networks, which added another $3 billion and pushed it to $7500/kilowatt. And that utility says that its current estimates are "Non-binding". A few years ago, Moodys put out a study (which they actually use to argue in favor of nuclear power as a climate solution) that undercuts its own argument. It quotes the $7500/kilowatt price I just did. It also quotes a price of $2000/kilowatt for wind and $3000/kilowatt for solar. Those are from 2007, and that's ignoring projections of a halving of solar installation costs over the next decade, but anyway. It winds up concluding that solar and nuclear are about even, because it puts the depreciation time for solar at 20 years and the depreciation time for nuclear at 40 years, so the total 40 year investment winds up being similar, but that is strongly dependent on the depreciation time, and there are, for example, 30-40 year old wind farms still running in California that were built during the late-70's energy crisis. The reality I see with nuclear is...right now, the startup/construction costs are huge, and they keep going up, rapidly. At best, nuclear is right now competitive with wind and solar, and at worst is several steps behind them, depending on how you do the math and how long the plants operate for. And wind and solar expect to see substantial cost decreases over the next few years, while nuclear is going rapidly the opposite direction. If I see data that disagrees with this assessment I'll reevaluate, but the numbers I keep seeing, consistent with every reactor cost estimate that comes through, appear to agree.

King Ferry

QUOTE (iamshack @ Feb 2, 2010 -> 04:01 PM) Do you guys really think it's a good thing for this country when kids have to think twice about furthering their education because it costs too much? College costs are about the only thing going up faster than healthcare costs in this country.

QUOTE (vandy125 @ Feb 2, 2010 -> 03:10 PM) Why should my taxes go to pay off someone else's loan who is not being responsible? Because otherwise they'll just give it to a bank?

Krypton

QUOTE (Soxy @ Feb 2, 2010 -> 01:33 PM) I refuse to believe that this is a representative sample. I imagine it is giving too much weight to the evangelical Republicans. I refuse to believe that 77% of anyone wants creationism taught in schools. That can't be true. The U.S. is darn near the bottom in belief in evolution in the Western World. Typically only Turkey is worse than us. It's about 40-50% of the entire population in most polls that flatly rejects it.

QUOTE (Tex @ Feb 2, 2010 -> 01:53 PM) Like paying for the Iraq war? Spending on Defense doesn't count.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Feb 2, 2010 -> 01:49 PM) The line should definitely be addressed before any other move in terms of importance. Both lines.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 2, 2010 -> 02:06 PM) He was injured implies exactly that, he was injured. It doesn't mean he is still injured. And if the Sox can keep Thome's back healthy, they would likely be able to put Branyan on a similar regimen, which would keep him relatively healthy. Not all back injuries are the same. No one's been able to keep Crede's back healthy, for example.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Feb 2, 2010 -> 12:18 PM) How many Republican votes you think he would get for revamping Medicare/Medicaid? Frankly, I don't think he'd get any of their votes for it if he followed their policy exactly and tried to end the whole thing.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Feb 2, 2010 -> 12:08 PM) And inherited a record deficit. Which is still smaller than it should be. The long-term deficit problem continues to be the fact that health care spending is going up at 3-5 times the yearly rate of inflation.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Feb 2, 2010 -> 12:03 PM) Come on, he has no choice? How about getting out of Iraq/Afghanistan like he promised he would do? How about reforming Medicare/Medicaid entitlements, revamping welfare, etc. There's a ton of spending he could cut, it's just not a popular thing to do. Revamping Welfare? Um, they did that 10 years ago. Getting out of Iraq? That'll be done this year. He promised to "Win" in Afghanistan, not to get out of it. We've been told that reforming Medicare/Medicaid = Nazism and Communism and so we're not allowed to do that and it can't possibly save money no matter how many studies say it will. The idea that there's a lot of un-cut discretionary spending out there is a flat out myth that pols use to get elected every cycle because it's easy to believe that the money being spent that I don't directly see myself is wasted. About the only place that's true is in the DOD, and as we all know, defense spending doesn't count.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Feb 2, 2010 -> 11:53 AM) I recognize that, but he's correct in this case. Taxes are going to rise under Obama's watch. There's not much overstating about that. You can't on one hand complain about the budget deficit and then on the other hand oppose everything that could be done to lower it.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Feb 2, 2010 -> 11:50 AM) Exactly. He won't see the light past Indianapolis, frankly. Dude, if Sarah Palin can get this far, if Huckabee can make sure his sermons aren't released, if Guiliani can continue to be consulted as an expert on terrorism issues, if Bush's National Guard documents can just conveniently vanish, then if there's a strong enough constituency that gets behind him, that'll all just wind up under the rug. The question is, how good are his people and how important are his backers.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Feb 2, 2010 -> 11:45 AM) A good chunk of the country is just paid to do nothing. And really, this just isn't true.

QUOTE (bmags @ Feb 2, 2010 -> 11:40 AM) Haha, great great thread. Wonderful story by Reuters, news industry at the top of their game. Also, the middle class doesn't benefit from medicare? Our military dominance? Social security? Highways? Your meat not being infested with diseases? Your medicine doing what it actually claims to do? Scholarship programs? News to me. The Middle Class certainly gets some goodies from the government, but the story of the Middle Class over the past 30 years is one of steady erosion of its economic position at the expense of the upper class, and at the very least, that's been reinforced by government policy, if not entirely driven by it.

Already it's obviously a much more "Big name film inclusive" list than that from last year. I really hope Avatar doesn't win.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Feb 2, 2010 -> 10:48 AM) Does this mean we aren't going to Mars anytime soon? I think we should go to Mars. Depending on how you define "We", we're already there. The real problem is getting there with people, and keeping them alive. The latter part is really, really hard.

Normal

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Feb 2, 2010 -> 10:42 AM) No, but I really don't see what we (the middle class) have gained out of this mess. Yeah, I guess things could be worse for some, but that doesn't mean anyone is better for it. You've gained much richer wall street execs, and the Right keeps telling me that'll trickle down.