Why Your Electricity Rates Are So High And May Triple
The simple answer to this question is that there is no
profit in cheap electricity. The people who run this show aren't interested in
cheap or efficient. Rather, they are seriously interested in maintaining or
escalating profits from either conventional or more expensive alternatives.
75 years ago, nuclear energy promised electricity too cheap
to meter, and it still does to this day. However, if it were allowed to be
developed the way it should have been developed, it would destroy trillions in
market value of fossil fuel resources owned by the uber wealthy. Accordingly,
the powers that be pulled the strings necessary to derail the true potential of
nuclear energy. Now, three generations later, the same game is being played
where a climate warming narrative is being used to impose three times more
expensive 'green' energy.
To support this assertion, it is necessary to explain how it
is nuclear energy was sabotaged such that the laymen can understand it. If a
person were to go to this site https://wwwndc.jaea.go.jp/cgi-bin/Tab80WWW.cgi?lib=J40&iso=Pb000 and look at the value in the eighth row of
the far right column, it shows a value of 2.395 (mb) milli-barns. This is the
relative probability that a lead atom will capture a fast neutron. This capture
process acts towards negating a sustainable nuclear chain reaction. If they go
to this page: https://wwwndc.jaea.go.jp/cgi-bin/Tab80WWW.cgi?lib=J40&iso=Th000,
and look at the values in rows 6 & 12 of the last column, it shows a
cumulative value of around 175 mb. These values are the combined probability
that a neutron would be absorbed by a thorium atom resulting in either a direct
fission or the first step of a two-step fission process. These values show that
thorium is 70 times more likely to absorb a neutron and inevitably fission than lead is to
eliminate neutrons from the reactor. In an infinite reactor, a thorium
concentration as low as a few percent would allow a self-sustaining reaction.
In a nut shell, all it takes to build a reactor is to salt a
tank of Lead with powdered fissionable metal. That's it. That is all it takes! This
is what might be called an ideal reactor. Instead, conventional reactors are
based on a scaled up submarine reactor? A case can be made that the nuclear
side of an ideal reactor, compared to a conventional reactor, could be built
for 100 times less in about one-tenth the time. Ultimately, an ideal reactor
can produce electricity for one-tenth the cost of conventional sources.
But what is most telling as to the claim that nuclear energy
was sabotaged is the safety characteristics of an ideal reactor versus a
conventional reactor. A conventional reactor can melt down with something as
simple as a tidal wave. Even worse, if we are ever in a first-world war or a
terrorist gets a piece of artillery within 10 miles of a reactor, an enemy can
use our reactors to inflict horrendous collateral damage on the civilian
population. Once the primary coolant system is irrevocably ruptured, there is
no way to stop a meltdown. In contrast, a simple tank-of-lead ideal reactor
cannot be used as a collateral damage weapon against its own population. In
fact, an ideal reactor really has no catastrophic failure scenario whatsoever.
It will not fail accidentally and if intentional destroyed, it would not result
in a catastrophic release of radioactive material. If it were bombed and the
lead were to be vented, it would rapidly congeal and encapsulate the
radioactive elements in the lead.
With this said, it needs to be asked "How was a reactor
that is inherently unsafe and prohibitively expensive, selected for large scale
industrialization?", when every engineer in the system knew that an ideal
reactor could be built so cheaply and was inherently safe. In writing this
article, I ask anyone reading it to call (202) 224-3121 and ask their representative that this issue be investigated. Otherwise, the reader and everyone else
in the world will be gouged with wind and solar electricity and a tripling of
our electric bill. Or even worse, our enemies will use our own reactors against us.
Here in Michigan, the sabotage was from the sub-contractors. It was the "Midland" power plant. Primary contractor and designer was Bechtel. They even built a 12 story office complex in Ann Arbor (University of Michigan) to host their people. Well into the Billions of dollars in cost, including over budget, the Federal inspectors noticed the concrete for the foundations were not the prescribed "9 bag" comment, but 4 bag. It was deemed a requirement to demolish the structures and start over, rendering the project not cost effective. It was converted into a Natural Gas power plant at 2X the cost of a new natural gas power plant. The Liberals in office allowed the power company to pass 100% of these costs onto the consumers.
ReplyDeleteNo one went to jail for the fraud.
There are some attention-grabbing deadlines on this article but I don’t know if I see all of them center to heart. There may be some validity however I'll take hold opinion until I look into it further. Good article , thanks and we want more! Added to FeedBurner as nicely casino online
ReplyDelete