WPPSS Columbia Generating Station Nuclear Power is 200% More Expensive Than Other Energy Sources, Still Claims It is Cheapest Energy Source, Ignores 2.5 Billion Financial Bond Disaster

WPPSS BIGGEST 2.5 BILLION MUNICIPAL BOND DEFAULT IN HISTORY OF US DUE TO NUCLEAR POWER DEBACLE, BUT NUCLEAR INDUSTRY SURVIVES AND THRIVES ANYWAY - WHY?

Wikipedia; "Over-commitment to nuclear power brought about the financial collapse of the Washington Public Power Supply System, which undertook to build five large nuclear power plants in the 1970s. By 1983, cost overruns and delays, along with a slowing of electricity demand growth, led to cancellation of two WPPSS plants and a construction halt on two others. Moreover, WPPSS defaulted on $2.25 billion of municipal bonds, which is the second largest municipal bond default in U.S. history.[2] The court case that followed took nearly a decade to resolve. The WPPSS acquired the nickname "Whoops" in the media.[1][3][4][5]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Northwest

400% COST OVER RUNS THE NORM, NOT THE EXCEPTION FOR BUILDING NEW NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS, WPPSS IS JUST ONE MANY EXAMPLES

Washington Public Power Supply System (WPPSS) HistoryLink.org Essay 5482

Several factors combined to ruin construction schedules and to drive costs to three and four times the original estimates. Inflation and design changes constantly plagued all the projects. Builders often got ahead of designers who modified their drawings to conform to what had been built. Safety changes imposed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission increased costs too, but the biggest cause of delays and overruns was mismanagement of the process by the WPPSS. The directors and the managers of the system had no experience in nuclear engineering or in projects of this scale. System managers were unable to develop a unified and comprehensive means of choosing, directing, and supervising contractors. One contractor, already shown to be incompetent, was retained for more work. In a well-publicized example, a pipe hanger was built and rebuilt 17 times. Quality control inspectors complained of inadequate work that went unaddressed

http://www.historylink.org/index.cfm?DisplayPage=output.cfm&File_Id=5482

Anyone doing research on nuclear power plants will find this same story, repeated over and over again, ad nauseum, no matter where in the world they are built. Just count on paying double to four times what was originally budgeted for. 

MOST EXPENSIVE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT IN THE USA

Costly To The Core

The Columbia Generating Station might still be a plus for the region if its cost of making electricity were also low. But McCullough found the plant’s cost of producing a megawatt hour over the past six years is about $36, roughly 1.5 times what more efficient nuclear plants spend. McCullough also found that it appears to be the most costly nuclear plant of its kind to run in the U.S. He and his team of six analysts crunched all of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission filings for 2006 through 2012 for 27 operating nuclear plants built and designed on the same basis as the Columbia Generating Station. “From what we can see, it’s the most expensive,” McCullough says. 

As a result, he found ratepayers last year spent $418 million for power from the Columbia Generating Station. They could have purchased the same power elsewhere for $218 million. For more details, click on link....

http://www.wweek.com/portland/article-21636-costly-to-the-core.html

The following report details the same information as the consultants report does above, confirming that Columbia Nuclear Power Generating Station is generating VERY expensive power, double the cost of power easily available on the open market. 

THE CENTER FOR LAND USE INTERPRETATION

The 1,170 megawatt reactor, built by General Electric, went on line at Hanford in 1984 - seven years behind schedule, and $2 billion over budget. A report issued in 2013, found that it was the (most) expensive nuclear power plant of its kind currently in operation in the U.S., producing a megawatt hour for roughly 1.5 times more than what more efficient nuclear power plants spend. Four other reactors in the proposed system were only partially built, including units 1 and 4, nearby on the Hanford Reservation, and 3 and 5 at Satsop, in western Washington.

http://clui.org/ludb/site/columbia-generating-station-formerly-wppss-2-nuclear-power-plant

COLUMBIA GENERATING STATION SITS ON TOP OF EARTHQUAKE FAULT

The DOE submitted an automatic 40 years relicensing proposal to the NRC. In case of a nuclear accident, this plant sits in a basin, where radiation would collect and concentrate. Spent highly radioactive fuel rods are stored, just like at Fukushima. 

According to the speaker, the Columbia nuclear plant sits on top of an earthquake fault, but the DOE did not include this information in their proposal for relicensing this worn out nuclear plant to the NRC. 

COLUMBIA GC IS BUILT WITH SAME DEFECTIVE ENGINEERING DESIGN AS FUKUSHIMA DAICHI

The Columbia Generating Station (CGS) sits on the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in the Columbia River northeast of Portland, generating less than 4% of the region's energy. Alliance for Democracy member Nancy Matela talks about the need to shut it down, describing the dangers posed by its' unneeded continued operation. The CGS design is a version of the Fukushima Nuclear Plant. Nancy talks about other plants across the nation with the same design as well as how to replace the energy upon closing.

DANCE TO UNFINISHED 2.5 BILLION FINANCIAL NUCLEAR PLANT DISASTER MUSIC 

Set to music, here is one of the unfinished WPPSS projects that is still sitting there, quietly rotting away, except for the dancer who performs, using it as a VERY expensive backdrop. Maybe she can organize a way to pay back all of the investors who lost their homes, shirts and lives in that financial nuclear disaster. 

LESSONS FROM WPPSS

Nuclear plant construction projects have encountered trouble all across the country. Federal agencies, investor- owned utilities, and publicly-owned utilities have all stumbled. With skyrocketing interest rates, inflating construction costs, and new safety demands on an immature technology, the times have not been good to nuclear power. WPPSS makes an especially good case study because it is a complex public agency. Many persons and interests contributed to the process, and its workings are open to view.

http://www.context.org/iclib/ic07/myers/

DESPITE WPPSS NUCLEAR FINANCIAL DISASTER AND MOST EXPENSIVE POWER IN THE US, PRO NUCLEAR APOLOGISTS WANT NEW NUCLEAR PLANT BUILT IN WASHINGTON

Via Cooter October 15, 2014  In the link below, second par. "and said Washington is missing out on money the federal government has been investing in nuclear power in other states." (It's all about the money and nothing else.)

http://capitolrecord.tvw.org/2014/02/senate-approves-study-on-nuclear-power-plants/#.VD6XsFduqq0

In the early 70's the environmental movement gained ground when it was disclosed that Washington Public Power Supply System (WPPSS) was lying through their teeth to get these monsters built. Disinformation, no information, hidden costs, hidden liabilities and deception led to their downfall.

http://www.historylink.org/index.cfm?DisplayPage=output.cfm&file_id=5482

COSTS OF NUCLEAR ENERGY CALCULATIONS DO NOT INCLUDE NUCLEAR WASTE STORAGE, PROCESSING, DECOMMISSIONING, OR OTHER COSTS

Via navilu October 15, 2014 @stock "The wastes produced by a 1000 MW capacity of this plant for 10000 reactor-years of operation would require enough power for the construction and maintenance of successive 100 yr surface storage facilities for a period of a million years. This power is 6 million MWt-yr of energy. But this is the energy in the form of electricity produced by the 1000 MW nuclear plant operating for 10,000 reactor-years of operation at 600 MW-yr per year. Thus the net energy output will be zero! If the plant cost X billion dollars, then the net cost per unit is infinity! Why should our progeny pay for costs incurred in useless actions by the subsidized profiteers? 

http://energyauditofnuclearfuelcycles.blogspot.in/2006/08/energy-audit-of-nuclear-fuel-cycles.html

The article above is pointing at the fact that there is no answer for nuclear wastes, so the cost of storing nuclear waste for 1 million years is not factored into the cost of running or operating a nuclear plant. Likewise, the cost and energy used during decommissioning and old worn out nuclear plant, which can exceed the cost of building the new plant, is also not calculated into the equations. The nuclear industry is full of such deceptions and sleights of hand. The deeper you look, the more you will find. 

Will the public be hoodwinked, bamboozled, bought off, bribed and deceived into another new nuclear power plant project in Washington? Time will tell.

Remember that no solar project has ever melted down and caused the destruction of thousands of square kilometers of land. No wind power project has ever contaminated the food supply globally. No water power project has ever caused people to be forced to leave their home town and then never be compensated for that loss, as the nuclear industry has.

Thanks for your generous and very appreciated support!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 Time Donation - AGRP Online Magazine - Monthly Donation - AGRP Online Magazine

A Green Road Eco Clothing/Products Store - Shop At A Green Road Amazon Store

More ways to support A Green Road Projects - AGRP on Twitter - Facebook - LinkedIn

Get Magazine Delivered To Your Email Address - AGRP App For Smartphones

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BOOKS, MOVIES, SUPPLIES

Click on link to access books about WPPSS

Click on link to access radiation detectors and supplies store

Click on link to access nuclear movies

Wikipedia; "Nuclear Implosions: The Rise and Fall of the Washington Public Power Supply System is a 2008 book by Daniel Pope, a history professor at the University of Oregon, which traces the history of the Washington Public Power Supply System, a public agency which undertook to build five large nuclear power plants, one of the most ambitious U.S. construction projects in the 1970s.

By 1983, cost overruns and delays, along with a slowing of electricity demand growth, led to cancellation of two plants and a construction halt on two others. Moreover, the agency defaulted on $2.25 billion of municipal bonds, which is still the largest municipal bond default in U.S. history. The court case that followed took nearly a decade to resolve.[1][2][3]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Implosions:_The_Rise_and_Fall_of_the_Washington_Public_Power_Supply_System

End

WPPSS Columbia Generating Station Nuclear Power is 200% More Expensive Than Other Energy Sources, Still Claims It is Cheapest Energy Source, Ignores 2.5 Billion Financial Bond Disaster
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2014/10/wppss-columbia-generating-station.html

For more articles like this;

Art And Science Of Deception; Global Corporations And The 1%
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/p/corporations-art-and-science-of.html

Website at www.agreenroadproject.org 

Youtube Video Channel (1,000 + Creative Commons Videos) http://tinyurl.com/agryoutube

Table of Contents http://tinyurl.com/agrindex 2,000 + Videos And Articles