For nuclear power and other corporate polluters, there is an inherent problem where government policies allow regulated monopolies to charge its rate base -- as in the case of South Florida -- and shift the ultimate costs of pollution to pursue multi-billion dollar profits. That is what is happening in the case of two nuclear reactors being planned by FPL -- funded by our monthly electricity bill-- at Turkey Point.
Beyond the matter of shifting the costs and benefits from taxpayers to private shareholders, what early money creates is a very big constituency within FPL, based in Juno Beach, to lobby for the most attractive financing to complete the project. For private shareholders, that means taxpayer guarantees authorized by Congress. To that, I say: no. Never.
My feelings about nuclear power are very mixed. But I am convinced that nuclear power in Homestead, Florida at Turkey Point is a disaster -- if not for radiation contaminating South Florida at very low levels then for what is in the weather forecast: sea level rise.
Nuclear power provides clean emissions if you don't count the astounding toxicity of fuel and waste. Whether or not advocates for nuclear power are correct about safety, disasters like Fukushima and Chernobyl speak for themselves. As a result, some nations are in full retreat from nuclear. Still, nuclear is probably the single power source capable of replacing the worst source of pollution at grid scale: coal.
On the other hand, there is no doubting what happens when sea levels rise as a consequence of CO2 emissions now rising to levels the earth last experienced long before human ancestors roamed.
Even if government allows new nuclear facilities to be built at Turkey Point on pads twenty feet high to protect against storm surge from hurricanes, FPL's rate base -- that is to say, you and me -- sea level rise from climate change cannot be stopped. (Come to the annual meeting of Friends of the Everglades on April 15 at Pinecrest Gardens, 1:30PM, to hear Dr. Harold Wanless talk about sea level rise in South Florida.)
FPL executives know the science on climate change and sea level rise is indisputable. They know, because they are dealing with the world's largest insurance companies whose bets are on the other side of the win/lose ledger. Sadly, so far the insurance industry has been shouting into an echo chamber.
The three to five foot rise predicted by the end of the century may be off, one way or another, by a few decades; no one claims to know exactly when the tides will rise. What we do know for certain-- because we have the mapping and data -- is that the consequences to the economy of South Florida and rate base of FPL will be catastrophic.
The debate on whether or not to build new nuclear at Turkey Point would be well informed by how the costs to the South Florida economy from sea level rise will be absorbed and who will pay. But I already have a simple solution.
Require all FPL executives above a certain annual compensation threshold, say $150,000, to put their additional wealth -- through FPL stock, pension and current compensation -- in "nuclear trusts".
These trusts could be drawn down for one sole purpose: to fund current and future family expenses and for insurance policies. They could not be used for collateral. The principal could not be touched. The insurance policies would kick in, when sea level rises two feet. The main purpose of the nuclear trusts would be to act as personal guarantees: when sea levels rise two feet, all nuclear trusts would be forfeited to the government treasury to help defray the costs for nuclear mitigation. These costs will, at a minimum, call for emergency decommissioning of nuclear power; processes that can take decades themselves to unwind. Let Congress put the costs of pollution squarely on the shoulders of the polluters.
Why not? It is only power and money.
Beyond the matter of shifting the costs and benefits from taxpayers to private shareholders, what early money creates is a very big constituency within FPL, based in Juno Beach, to lobby for the most attractive financing to complete the project. For private shareholders, that means taxpayer guarantees authorized by Congress. To that, I say: no. Never.
My feelings about nuclear power are very mixed. But I am convinced that nuclear power in Homestead, Florida at Turkey Point is a disaster -- if not for radiation contaminating South Florida at very low levels then for what is in the weather forecast: sea level rise.
Nuclear power provides clean emissions if you don't count the astounding toxicity of fuel and waste. Whether or not advocates for nuclear power are correct about safety, disasters like Fukushima and Chernobyl speak for themselves. As a result, some nations are in full retreat from nuclear. Still, nuclear is probably the single power source capable of replacing the worst source of pollution at grid scale: coal.
On the other hand, there is no doubting what happens when sea levels rise as a consequence of CO2 emissions now rising to levels the earth last experienced long before human ancestors roamed.
Even if government allows new nuclear facilities to be built at Turkey Point on pads twenty feet high to protect against storm surge from hurricanes, FPL's rate base -- that is to say, you and me -- sea level rise from climate change cannot be stopped. (Come to the annual meeting of Friends of the Everglades on April 15 at Pinecrest Gardens, 1:30PM, to hear Dr. Harold Wanless talk about sea level rise in South Florida.)
FPL executives know the science on climate change and sea level rise is indisputable. They know, because they are dealing with the world's largest insurance companies whose bets are on the other side of the win/lose ledger. Sadly, so far the insurance industry has been shouting into an echo chamber.
The three to five foot rise predicted by the end of the century may be off, one way or another, by a few decades; no one claims to know exactly when the tides will rise. What we do know for certain-- because we have the mapping and data -- is that the consequences to the economy of South Florida and rate base of FPL will be catastrophic.
The debate on whether or not to build new nuclear at Turkey Point would be well informed by how the costs to the South Florida economy from sea level rise will be absorbed and who will pay. But I already have a simple solution.
Require all FPL executives above a certain annual compensation threshold, say $150,000, to put their additional wealth -- through FPL stock, pension and current compensation -- in "nuclear trusts".
These trusts could be drawn down for one sole purpose: to fund current and future family expenses and for insurance policies. They could not be used for collateral. The principal could not be touched. The insurance policies would kick in, when sea level rises two feet. The main purpose of the nuclear trusts would be to act as personal guarantees: when sea levels rise two feet, all nuclear trusts would be forfeited to the government treasury to help defray the costs for nuclear mitigation. These costs will, at a minimum, call for emergency decommissioning of nuclear power; processes that can take decades themselves to unwind. Let Congress put the costs of pollution squarely on the shoulders of the polluters.
Why not? It is only power and money.
5 comments:
Why don't you refuse to use FPL power. If everyone would just turn off their lights and air conditioners, we wouldn't need reactors or even coal or oil fired boilers.
The only problem is the money they collect from we taxpayers will be used to bribe the politicians so that mo matter what we the public say, they will do anything they like.
Wow, well, asshole above, if you dont like all the polution associated with the power industry, stop using power, asshole. Maybe since you're so smart, come up with a cleaner solution. Did you know that FPL has a program where you can pay extra to use "clean" power, but only assholes would go out and spend an extra $50 a month for the same power everyone else uses. So maybe you can enroll in that program, and show your support to the green cause instead of setting up 3 acres of solar panels or a 200 foot tall windmill since you cant turn off your a/c to make a point, asshole
What pollution and what low level radioactive contamination? Do you have measurements, or any other scientific data? In other words, do you have any facts to support the diarrhea emanating from your pie hole?
For all your negative invective and high handed hubris, it's all just hot air without any scientific basis in fact. It's fantasy, an illusion, and histrionics to support your radical environmental views. Balance is the key. We're I you, I'd try to find some?
Do you have a job? Who do you work for. What are their environmental policies? Enquiring minds want to know. Or are you just independently wealthy and just fuck with people and corporations that are actually contributing to society versus sucking the life out of it. Get a job!
First of all I just want to say "Wake up Florida", FPL is a monopoly. We are not harnessing the sun, we are behind Arizona, California, even New Jersey is getting greener. Enough of all the lobbyist with the Red Necks in Tallahassee because they get funded to be elected. This is such an injustice to the people of Florida. We are not investing in Solar, wind, etc. People in Florida are still doing the siesta, this is still the south where the plantations were. We should not pay a penny for FPL nuclear reactors, and on top they had mishaps already at Turkey Point. Not even their shakeholder want to invest in FPL nuclear reactors. Wether you have a house & apt you are paying top dollar for electricity. Just look at TD Bank in Broward County is a net zero building, so it can be done
Post a Comment