Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse

Firehouse.com Forum Rules & Guidelines

Forum Rules & Guidelines

Not Permitted or Tolerated:
• Advertising and/or links of commercial, for-profit websites, products, and/or services is not permitted. If you have a need to advertise on Firehouse.com please contact [email protected]
• Fighting/arguing
• Cyber-bullying
• Swearing
• Name-calling and/or personal attacks
• Spamming
• Typing in all CAPS
• “l33t speak” - Substituting characters for letters in an effort to represent a word or phrase. (example: M*****ive)
• Distribution of another person’s personal information, regardless of whether or not said information is public knowledge and whether or not an individual has permission to post said personal information
• Piracy advocation of any kind
• Racist, sexual, hate type defamatory, religious, political, or sexual commentary.
• Multiple forum accounts

Forum Posting Guidelines:

Posts must be on-topic, non-disruptive and relevant to the firefighting community. Post only in a mature and responsible way that contributes to the discussion at hand. Posting relevant information, helpful suggestions and/or constructive criticism is a great way to contribute to the community.

Post in the correct forum and have clear titles for your threads.

Please post in English or provide a translation.

There are moderators and admins who handle these forums with care, do not resort to self-help, instead please utilize the reporting option. Be mature and responsible for yourself and your posts. If you are offended by another member utilize the reporting option. All reported posts will be addressed and dealt with as deemed appropriate by Firehouse.com staff.

Firehouse.com Moderation Process:
Effective immediately, the following moderation process will take effect. User(s) whose posts are determined by Firehouse.com staff to be in violation of any of the rules above will EARN the following reprimand(s) in the moderation process:
1. An initial warning will be issued.
2. A Final Warning will be issued if a user is found to be in violation a second time.
3. A 3-day suspension will be issued if the user continues to break the forum rules.
4. A 45-day suspension will be issued if the user is found to be a habitual rule breaker.
5. Habitual rule breakers that have exhausted all of the above will receive a permanent life-time ban that will be strictly enforced. Reinstatement will not be allowed – there is no appeal process.

Subsequent accounts created in an effort to side-step the rules and moderation process are subject to automatic removal without notice. Firehouse.com reserves the right to expedite the reprimand process for any users as it is deemed necessary. Any user in the moderation process may be required to review and agree to by email the terms and conditions listed above before their account is re-instated (except for those that are banned).

Firehouse.com reserves the right to edit and/or remove any post or member, at any time, for any reason without notice. Firehouse.com also reserves the right to warn, suspend, and/or ban, any member, at any time, for any reason.

Firehouse.com values the active participation we have in our forums. Please ensure your posts are tasteful and tactful. Thank you very much for your cooperation.
See more
See less

Chicken sh*t Nancy Pelosi!!!!!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by scfire86 View Post
    I think a little more than 80% of France’s energy is derived via nukes.

    A couple of points you might not find so rosy:

    100% of those plants are owned and run by the state; there is no private enterprise involved.

    The French are more efficent in reusing the waste than we are, but they have just as many problems finding a place to bury the waste as we do. The “solution” was to effectively bribe the province receiving the waste with a government-funded and -run lab to “study” the waste, since the French have been unable to force any province to simply receive the waste and have it buried deep underground.

    The cost of the nuke power is acceptable to the French because they lack options–the country has no coal or natural gas and few hydro plants. That contrasts with the US, which has a sizeable supply of coal, lots of hydro and natural gas to power plants, which makes nuke plants less cost-effective than they are in France.

    The cost of construction, combined with the cost of operation, has meant that no utility has finished a new plant in the US in 17 years. As far as existing plants are concerned, the failure of the Yankee plants in New England (plant in CT closed 10 years early, plant in ME which wasn’t cost-effective to run and closed early, and plant in MA–the first in the US–which was closed early because of structural issue), along with the WPPSS (largest utility bond default in US history, two plants abandoned about 60% completed 25 years ago) shows enormous financial risks for utilities.

    If you’re comfortable with the Feds running a network (whom you constantly like to remind us can screw up a free picnic) of nukes in this country as the French do, then the idea might work. They’ll supervise the construction and operation of the plants with the high-efficiency and superb oversight than only the Federal government can do. Otherwise, the private sector isn’t going to spend its money on nukes for the time being.

    The most important factor to remember is that just as alternative sources of fuel don’t become financially viable until the price of a barrel of oil goes through the roof, the viability of nuclear power in the US depends upon more conventional methods of generation becoming much more expensive than currently available.
    The reason that nuclear power is needed is the sheer number of power plants that use oil or natural gas to generate power. They are already much more expensive than they were last year.

    The problem with every project like this IS the government. They need to be out of it. Whenever the government is involved the bureacracy and red tape slows projects down and drives costs up. There most certainly must be oversight and regulation. But reasonable levels of oversight and regulation, along with encouragment to use the latest technolofgy and financial incentives for finishing these plants will make this work.
    PROUD, HONORED AND HUMBLED RECIPIENT OF THE PURPLE HYDRANT AWARD - 10/2007.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by GeorgeWendtCFI View Post
      So the fact that the price of oil began a $35 or so nosedive the day after the Pres. announced this lifting of the ban (hardly idle chatter) is a complete conincidence? That is what you want the confused masses to believe? Priceless.
      I gave my reasons. The reason for the price slide in oil is diminshed demand from those countries with expanding economies. Hence the increased inventories. Which cost money to store by the way in case you didn't know.

      Your claim is similar to the one I stated earlier that I've never been rained on since I started carrying an umbrella in my car.

      Priceless indeed.
      They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

      I'm not saying you're stupid. I'm saying you have bad luck when it comes to thinking.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by GeorgeWendtCFI View Post
        The reason that nuclear power is needed is the sheer number of power plants that use oil or natural gas to generate power. They are already much more expensive than they were last year.
        I doubt the private sector (if you consider utility companies to be private companies) will be beating down the doors to build nukes without some type of subsidy.

        Originally posted by GeorgeWendtCFI View Post
        The problem with every project like this IS the government. They need to be out of it. Whenever the government is involved the bureacracy and red tape slows projects down and drives costs up. There most certainly must be oversight and regulation. But reasonable levels of oversight and regulation, along with encouragment to use the latest technolofgy and financial incentives for finishing these plants will make this work.
        That is a relative term. Reasonable according to whom?
        They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

        I'm not saying you're stupid. I'm saying you have bad luck when it comes to thinking.

        Comment


        • I doubt the private sector (if you consider utility companies to be private companies to be private) will be beating down the doors to build nukes without some type of subsidy.
          And to encourage significant investment such as this, there should be incentives and/or subsidies.

          That is a relative term. Reasonable according to whom?
          Somewhere in the middle of hopeless bureacratic quagmire and none.
          PROUD, HONORED AND HUMBLED RECIPIENT OF THE PURPLE HYDRANT AWARD - 10/2007.

          Comment


          • The reason for the price slide in oil is diminshed demand from those countries with expanding economies.
            Which began the day after the Pres. amde the announcement. That would make it, accorsing to your explanation, a coincidence.
            PROUD, HONORED AND HUMBLED RECIPIENT OF THE PURPLE HYDRANT AWARD - 10/2007.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by scfire86 View Post
              100% of those plants are owned and run by the state; there is no private enterprise involved.

              If you’re comfortable with the Feds running a network (whom you constantly like to remind us can screw up a free picnic) of nukes in this country as the French do, then the idea might work. They’ll supervise the construction and operation of the plants with the high-efficiency and superb oversight than only the Federal government can do. Otherwise, the private sector isn’t going to spend its money on nukes for the time being.
              scfire86,
              Your faith in the Federal Government is sorely misplaced. With the exception of taking military action against our enemies, there is little that ANY government can do better than the private sector.

              Having the Feds setup minimum standards for construction and operation, or final approval for any design is fine, but the government needs to stay out of the way.
              Last edited by txgp17; 10-27-2013, 03:28 PM.
              The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened. --Norman Mattoon Thomas, 6 time presidential candidate for the Socialist Party of America

              Comment


              • [QUOTE=scfire86;979447]

                A couple of points you might not find so rosy:

                100% of those plants are owned and run by the state; there is no private enterprise involved.

                If you’re comfortable with the Feds running a network (whom you constantly like to remind us can screw up a free picnic) of nukes in this country as the French do, then the idea might work. QUOTE]

                The Tennessee Valley Authority isn't a government agency created by Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal?My great Uncle worked for them for years.His checks were cut by the US government,not a private company and not on the State of Alabama.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by doughesson View Post
                  The Tennessee Valley Authority isn't a government agency created by Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal?My great Uncle worked for them for years.His checks were cut by the US government,not a private company and not on the State of Alabama.
                  I think scfire86 was referring to French Nuclear Power Plants.
                  The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened. --Norman Mattoon Thomas, 6 time presidential candidate for the Socialist Party of America

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by txgp17 View Post
                    I think scfire86 was referring to French Nuclear Power Plants.
                    I pointed that out in my post.Check it again.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by txgp17 View Post
                      scfire86,
                      Your faith in the Federal Government is sorely misplaced. With the exception of taking military action against out enemies, there is little that ANY government can do better than the private sector.
                      Yeah okay. The next laff riot you're going to claim is there are no inefficiencies in the DoD. The redundancy of tasks is but one area I can think of off the top of my head.

                      Why does each branch require its own air wing? Couldn't one group do that? Or why are multiple infantry units required in different branches? Those are but two of many.

                      I would argue there are numerous things the Feds do better than the private sector other than military action. But it is strictly a matter of perspective.
                      Last edited by scfire86; 08-19-2008, 01:51 PM.
                      They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

                      I'm not saying you're stupid. I'm saying you have bad luck when it comes to thinking.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by GeorgeWendtCFI View Post
                        And to encourage significant investment such as this, there should be incentives and/or subsidies.
                        Why should this group be given tax breaks not available to the rest of us? When a group is given a tax break or subsidy it means someone else is picking up the cost. Who do you think that group might be? Do they not utilize the same services offered by our society that provides for them? This is an interesting POV for someone who embraces the conservative ideal. It's in direct conflict with that ideology.

                        I know it's a stretch for you since you probably still believe the GOP is the party of smaller government and lower taxes.

                        Originally posted by GeorgeWendtCFI View Post
                        Somewhere in the middle of hopeless bureacratic quagmire and none.
                        And who will be the arbiter of that?

                        Originally posted by GeorgeWendtCFI View Post
                        Which began the day after the Pres. amde the announcement. That would make it, accorsing to your explanation, a coincidence.
                        So you're saying the President's decision to lift offshore drilling ban is responsible for the decreased demand for petroleum in China and India? And what do you base this upon other than your own conjecture? That's a lot of water to carry and you aren't Gunga Din. A decrease in demand occurs because the price is too high. Pretty simple stuff really.

                        I'll ask you again. Point me to one oil commodities broker who is recommending buy or sell positions based upon what the supply of oil might be in 10 years and I'll agree with you. Especially given the amount of that supply is less than 10% of the total projected demand by the time it comes online.
                        Last edited by scfire86; 08-19-2008, 02:13 PM.
                        They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

                        I'm not saying you're stupid. I'm saying you have bad luck when it comes to thinking.

                        Comment


                        • Why should this group be given tax breaks not available to the rest of us? When a group is given a tax break or subsidy it means someone else is picking up the cost. Who do you think that group might be? Do they not utilize the same services offered by our society that provides for them? This is an interesting POV for someone who embraces the conservative ideal. It's in direct conflict with that ideology.

                          I know it's a stretch for you since you probably still believe the GOP is the party of smaller government and lower taxes.
                          Because we are in a crisis situation and a temporary financial incentive to jump start this development is, IMO, completely appropriate.

                          BTW, you haven't seen me write the smaller government/lower taxes comment in at least a couple of years. The GOP has lost their way in many areas, that being one of them.

                          And who will be the arbiter of that?
                          I have no idea. I have alot of answers, but not all of the answers.

                          So you're saying the President's decision to lift offshore drilling ban is responsible for the decreased demand for petroleum in China and India? And what do you base this upon other than your own conjecture? That's a lot of water to carry and you aren't Gunga Din. A decrease in demand occurs because the price is too high. Pretty simple stuff really.

                          I'll ask you again. Point me to one oil commodities broker who is recommending buy or sell positions based upon what the supply of oil might be in 10 years and I'll agree with you. Especially given the amount of that supply is less than 10% of the total projected demand by the time it comes online.
                          I never ever drew a correlation between the Pres. announcement and anything other than lower prices. The facts do not lie. It is a fact that the nose dive began the day after he made the announcement. Oil fell about $30-35 bbl. immediately following his announcement. To suggest that there were other factors influencing the price drop means that the timing was a mere coincidence.

                          You have pretty much lost this point already.
                          PROUD, HONORED AND HUMBLED RECIPIENT OF THE PURPLE HYDRANT AWARD - 10/2007.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by scfire86 View Post
                            Yeah okay. The next laff riot you're going to claim is there are no inefficiencies in the DoD.
                            First, I don't know what a laff riot is. Is that some kind of cartoon? Second, you're trying to put words in my mouth again. I never said the DoD was efficient. And doing something efficiently is NOT the same as doing something better. Your attempt to steer the argument into a different zip code has failed. If we critique the DoD's efficiency, then they would pale in comparison to successful private military companies like Executive Outcomes or Blackwater. Exec Outcomes was keeping the peace quite well in Angola, but when Bill Clinton led the effort to oust them, the UN came in behind them with almost 10 times as many troops, and couldn't keep the peace.
                            Originally posted by scfire86 View Post
                            The redundancy of tasks is but one area I can think of off the top of my head. Why does each branch require its own air wing?
                            Do you think you're the first person to ask that? Robert McNamara already pushed for this almost 40 years ago, and failed. The Navy's needs vary greatly from those of the Air Force. And when you design a plane that can do everything, it ends up being too heavy to do anything well. Same thing applies to the differences found in Rural Pumper/Tankers versus a short wheel base Custom Chassis Municipal Pumpers.
                            Originally posted by scfire86 View Post
                            Couldn't one group do that? Or why are multiple infantry units required in different branches? Those are but two of many.
                            Once again, no one said they were efficient, only that they were good at it.

                            The rest of America's Government programs usually provide both inefficiency and lackluster performance.
                            The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened. --Norman Mattoon Thomas, 6 time presidential candidate for the Socialist Party of America

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by GeorgeWendtCFI View Post
                              And to encourage significant investment such as this, there should be incentives and/or subsidies.


                              Somewhere in the middle of hopeless bureacratic quagmire and none.
                              SC and the rest of his ilk in the socialist world would define a subsidy as getting the fed gov't and the envirowacko shakedown artists out of the way. As this would eiminate 5yr and 50% of the expense of constucting a new major energy project (nuc, refinery, pipeline etc). So a CORPORTATION (evil) saves $ = subsidy. The huge cost of a nuc plant isn't due to the cost of concrete.

                              A primitive example would be the NorthSlope/Alaska pipeline. The wackos (who were just getting started) delay the project 5 years. Actual construction only took about 2yr. Ran the project costs up exponentially. Today would never get down. If the eviromental wackos had not interfered the pipeline would have been completed before the 1973 oil crisis (wouldn't have been one). Hummm rather similar to today.

                              Comment


                              • If we critique the DoD's efficiency, then they would pale in comparison to successful private military companies like Executive Outcomes or Blackwater.
                                You mean the same Blackwater who is quitting the "security" business as a result of the murderous rampages and underhanded activities (along with other "contractors" who bilked the taxpayers out of billions) in which its personnel took part while in Iraq?
                                Member IACOJ

                                Comment

                                300x600 Ad Unit (In-View)

                                Collapse

                                Upper 300x250

                                Collapse

                                Taboola

                                Collapse

                                Leader

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X