Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
$3 BILLION FOR WIND AND
CONSERVATION IS ABOUT 1/10th
THAT.
ON THE COST ISSUE, IT DOESN'T
MAKE SENSE.
IT'S THE MOST CATASTROPHICALLY
WAY TO BOIL A POT OF WATER
THAT'S EVER BEEN DEVISED.
SECONDLY, ON SAFETY, IT'S NOT
JUST THE ENVIRONMENTAL
COMMUNITY.
IT IS SAYING THAT THIS IS NOT A
SAFE INDUSTRY.
IT'S THE INSURANCE INDUSTRY.
THESE PLANTS AND THIS INDUSTRY
CANNOT GET INSURANCE, SO
CONGRESS HAD TO GO IN THE MIDDLE
OF THE NIGHT AND PASS THE PRICE
ANDERSON ACT, WHICH HAS
RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE DAMAGES
THAT ARE CAUTIONED BY LEAKS OR
ACCIDENTS FROM THEIR PLANTS, AND
THERE IS NO OTHER INDUSTRY IN
THE WORLD THAT HAS THAT
ADVANTAGE.
NOT ONLY DO WE HAVE TO PAY $14
BILLION FOR THE PLANT BUT THEN
YOU HAVE TO STORE THE WASTE FOR
30,000 YEARS, WHICH IS FIVE
TIMES THE LENGTH OF RECORDED
HUMAN HISTORY AND HOW THAT CAN
EVER BE ECONOMIC IS FOR
SOMEBODY -- SOMEBODY'S GOT TO
MAKE THAT CASE.
>> ROBERT STERN, I GUESS YOU'RE
THE PERFECT MAN TO MAKE IT, SO
COME ON.
JUST YOUR DEBUNKED YOUR ENTIRE
CLAIM.
>> I UNDERSTAND THAT.
THE COST THING IS A RED HERRING.
WE HAVEN'T BUILT NUCLEAR PLANTS
IN 0 YEARS IN THIS COUNTRY.
WE GOT A FEW GOING UP NOW.
YOU COULD HAVE SAID THE EXACT
SAME THING ABOUT SOLAR A FEW
YEARS AGO.
SOLAR PLUMMETED, WHAT, 1,000% IN
THE LAST DECADE BECAUSE WE
CREATED A MARKET THROUGH
SUBSIDES AND MASS PRODUCE THEM
IN CHINA NOW.
THE COST HAS COME DOWN.
THE FUTURE ON NUCLEAR ENERGY
WILL NOT BE THE ONE OFF PLANTS,
MANUFACTURING COMPONENTS,