|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
The nuclear power sky is falling...
TEPCO seeks additional public money injection
The operator of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant has asked for more public funds from a government-backed entity to avoid negative net worth and to compensate the victims of the nuclear crisis at the facility. Tokyo Electric Power Company, or TEPCO, on Thursday asked the entity set up to help compensate the victims for one trillion yen, or over 12 billion dollars, for capital reinforcement. The utility also requested about 10 billion dollars to bolster its reserves for compensation. Approval of the requests would put the total amount of public funds injected into the utility at more than 40 billion dollars. The requests are part of a business renewal plan that TEPCO is compiling. The utility gave up on completing the plan this month, due to key issues such as the size of the share in TEPCO that it will allow the government to take in exchange for the funds. TEPCO also opposes the government's plan to reshuffle the firm's management. TEPCO President Toshio Nishizawa expressed hope that the utility wants to do business in the private sector while implementing management reforms. TEPCO faces financial difficulties amid increasing fuel costs for thermal power plants. Without state support, the utility's liabilities could exceed its assets during the fiscal year starting in April. Thursday, March 29, 2012 20:00 +0900 (JST) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
The nuclear power sky is falling...
Approval of the requests would put the total amount of public funds
injected into the utility at more than 40 billion dollars.. think of this in a short time japan is spending 40 billion tokeep TEPCO solvent. Take any US nuke plant near a major city, it melts down for any reason.......... establish a 5 mile exclusion zone...... how many billion do you think it would cost US taxpayers? no make that trillions..... theres no insurance cverage for us nuke plants that melt down, all risk is on us government.. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
The nuclear power sky is falling...
theres no insurance cverage for us nuke plants that melt down, all risk is on us government.. Consumers of products, services and Electric rate payers cover all the cost, all the time. in the case of a meltdown the government will be stuck with the costs in the USA. now imagine a meltdown near a major metropolitian area. in the case of the plant near new york at least 8 million people would be displaced, most permanetely. the costs would be staggering |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
The nuclear power sky is falling...
On Mar 31, 12:39*pm, Brad Guth wrote:
On Mar 31, 7:27*am, bob haller wrote: theres no insurance cverage for us nuke plants that melt down, all risk is on us government.. Consumers of products, services and Electric rate payers cover all the cost, all the time. in the case of a meltdown the government will be stuck with the costs in the USA. now imagine a meltdown near a major metropolitian area. in the case of the plant near new york at least 8 million people would be displaced, most permanetely. the costs would be staggering Consumers of products, goods and services, as well as Electric rate payers have always covered all the cost, all the time, including all that any insurance pays for. For the same amount of energy, thorium fueled reactors wouldn't have cost us at most 10% to date, and the whole damn world would have been ten thousand percent better off. *So, why not go with the substantially cheaper and otherwise more failsafe thorium fueled reactors? *http://groups.google.com/groups/search *http://translate.google.com/# *Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet” you fail to get it, in the event of a fukashima or chernobyl scale event the following are uninsured all individuals since homeowners and property coverage exclude nuke accidents...... the nuke power industry is off the hook too............ its all picked up by uncle sam |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
The nuclear power sky is falling...
On Mar 31, 7:17*pm, bob haller wrote:
On Mar 31, 12:39*pm, Brad Guth wrote: On Mar 31, 7:27*am, bob haller wrote: theres no insurance cverage for us nuke plants that melt down, all risk is on us government.. Consumers of products, services and Electric rate payers cover all the cost, all the time. in the case of a meltdown the government will be stuck with the costs in the USA. now imagine a meltdown near a major metropolitian area. in the case of the plant near new york at least 8 million people would be displaced, most permanetely. the costs would be staggering Consumers of products, goods and services, as well as Electric rate payers have always covered all the cost, all the time, including all that any insurance pays for. For the same amount of energy, thorium fueled reactors wouldn't have cost us at most 10% to date, and the whole damn world would have been ten thousand percent better off. *So, why not go with the substantially cheaper and otherwise more failsafe thorium fueled reactors? *http://groups.google.com/groups/search *http://translate.google.com/# *Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet” you fail to get it, in the event of a fukashima or chernobyl scale event the following are uninsured all individuals since homeowners and property coverage exclude nuke accidents...... the nuke power industry is off the hook too............ its all picked up by uncle sam There's no law, policy or constitutional provision that's preventing government from constructing and operating a thousand thorium fueled reactors, and selling that clean failsafe energy to its republic at cost. Obviously you want only Big Energy Mafia in charge. Why is that? At roughly 10% the ongoing cost of our vast military industrial complex, we could have been energy independent as of more than a decade ago, as well as exporting surplus energy and products. So, why are you opposed to this? http://groups.google.com/groups/search http://translate.google.com/# Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet” |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The nuclear power sky is falling... | bob haller | Policy | 5 | April 3rd 12 05:22 AM |
The nuclear power sky is falling... | bob haller | Policy | 9 | March 21st 12 04:12 AM |
The nuclear power sky is falling... | bob haller | Policy | 1 | March 20th 12 08:39 PM |
The nuclear power sky is falling... | bob haller | Policy | 14 | March 15th 12 03:08 AM |
The nuclear power sky is falling... | [email protected] | | Policy | 68 | March 5th 12 03:40 AM |