so they say.
san antonio public utility, CPS Energy, has decided that we need new nuclear power generation reactors to join the two existing ones in bay city, texas. We’ll not get into the disastrous fiasco the building of them was…
This is the FIRST permit request to build a new nuclear reactor in almost thirty years!
Nuclear is Safe, nonpolluting and clean energy that is necessary for san antonio to survive growth projections.
This is what our public utility tells us.
what’s the reality?
SAfe Nuclear – HOW?
uranium mining pollutes permanently at the mining site
terrorist attacks on nuclear plants have been documented by
homeland security to be a significant risk
nuclear waste contaminates for generations and we’ve found
no way to safely deal with permanent storage or deactivating it
american uranium mining is almost nonexistent, so dependency on
foreign uranium makes us safer how?
in addition to aforementioned safety issues, there is the fact that the government allows for 12 deaths related to nuclear reactors
carbon emissions are only taken into consideration when looking at the reactors, not the full cycle including mining and transport which does release CO2
the feds allow a certain level of radiation release from nuclear reactors
and i could go on, but let’s move to the motivations and lies driving CPS’ agenda…
“We need more power to meet the needs of growth.”
If that’s the case, why did we shut down 340 megawatts of power generation this year?
What about the new Coal plant being built that’s coming on line next year?
Why does CPS plan to sell more at least half the energy from the proposed nuclear
reactors to the open market?
What about CPS’ own report about how energy efficiency programs would solve
the demand need more than a new polluting plant of any kind?
Jennifer Ramos, CC member District 3 asked about protecting rate payers based on the fact that CPS plans on selling extra energy into the open market.
all i heard was blah blah blah we buy and sell all the time blah blah blah bottom line is we always commit our lowest price fuels to our local customers first…Steve Bartley at CPS
rebut – how much are you looking to sell on the open market – response: stay in project at 40% to give us partnership opportunity. aka NO answer!
“NRG has a lot of expertise in the financial world.” that’s what CPS rep Steve Bartley told us tonight. A bankrupt company has lots of expertise in spending I’d like to see them get a personal loan!
“We are a not for profit entity and we aren’t looking to make a profit.” paraphrase of Paula Gold-Williams. AND that’s why you want to make a profit off of selling excess energy generated by new plants? help me out here.
“what opportunities are available for local small businesses in this project?’ – Dr. Jerry Lin
preliminary list of ops for SB on website. – substantial amount of work and a wide range of opportunities. retain significant amount of ownership so we can have a seat at the table for workforce and vendor ops. skilled labor in SA will have a chance to work on this project. -Jelynne LeBlanc-Burley
ok so, while building the plant creates jobs for the construction industry in a town far away from home for those who are desperate enough to work in a highly dangerous construction environment and then when it’s done, no more jobs. i think like five people work at the existing plants. yay jobs!
According to CPS has four plans:
2. natural gas
3. natural gas combo plant
they claim that there is no other baseload technology in existence today…hmmm…seems they might be averting their eyes from reality maybe?
The cost overrun figures are confidential, was the gist of what Paul Barharm told us today.
We committed to Mission Verde to make San Antonio a leader in Green Technology, Jobs and Sustainability. – mary alice cisneros started her question. (i’m proud of my councilwoman for asking the question, i would have followed up as you’ll see below)
Nuclear is not in conflict with Mission Verde because we will be taking carbon emissions out of the air here in SA. – CPS rep
HOW? Really HOW?
City council people are too nice with CPS – they work for you!!!! don’t thank them for answering your question when they avoid it in their answer!!!!!!!!!
how will fixed income people be protected from these rate hikes? – phillip cortez district 4
john saenz, senior vp retail energy, cps responds – there are rebates in place,
despite generation option there will always be programs for those in need. 1. extended
bill due date – add 10 days to due date for elderly, 2. low income discount, offset
impact to low income folks 3. REAP program, 4. tell them about energy efficiency
and conservation, 5. weatherization program.
hey wait, my power is going to be shut off tomorrow cause i’m unemployed and poor, what’s up with that?
contingency plan if nuclear not implemented? – David Medina, District 5 CC member
Mike Kotara repeated the four options above.
i missed a couple lies in my attempts to transcribe…but why are they so committed to this plan? who knows?
District 6, ray lopez, CC member: alternatives what extent have they studied them, and since tech is developing quickly, when will renewables leap frog ahead? (summary i think)
we’ve studied all nuclear techs in the last three years – Mike Kotara (but we didn’t look at renewables because they aren’t worthwhile)
Cris Eugster – tech is changing. we think energy storage is critical for renewables and we don’t know how to store it…and we need to spend our money wisely, we only have three options, gas, coal and nuclear because renewables aren’t good enough technologically, but in 2030 maybe solar will work…
how much are these guys and gals getting paid to spout this ignorance?
MIT disagrees and i’m sure they don’t have a vested interest in keeping their jobs at CPS by towing the nuclear liine: http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2008/oxygen-0731.html
Rates went down by $7billion for ratepayers? WHAT? mine went up and so did those of everyone i know!
ok i’m sick of this dog and pony show.
more to come…stay tuned