Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Robert L. Franck's avatar

I went to Naval Nuclear Power training outside of Idaho Falls in the 70's. I then served as a Reactor Operator for the Navy for the next 3.5 years. Reactors do use water for cooling, but the water is not consumed. There may very well be arguments against commercial Nuclear produced electricity, especially in regards to the cost to the end consumer, but the water argument seems manageable. Please stay on top of this issue. Power through grants seems a bit dubious on it's face.

Expand full comment
amy roessner's avatar

I do not believe Nuclear is what Idaho needs. I lived in Oregon and Nevada! Oregon had Nuclear reactor on the Columbia, and again the rods had to have tons of cool water on them to keep them from blowing up, let alone talk about the radiation and how it pollutes everything! The fish in the Columbia have developed extra eyes and fins; not good since we eat the fish! Nevada took in other states nuclear waste, and put it in the ground above the aquafer in Pahrump, so all the waste could pollute the water and ground! For a dollar!

I believe it's the country of Sweden that has a large plant that powers electricity and heat for people and it burns human waste. That is a good way to get rid of waste and give people employment. NO smell and gets rid of polluting stuff! I would be happier to see the waste burning plant in Jerome instead of Nuclear!

Expand full comment
4 more comments...

No posts