[NukeNet] Fwd: Wishful thinking? Update!

Sun Mar 9 18:48:18 EDT 2008

To All,

The Florida PSC Staff has asked for and gotten a three day  extension of 
their time to submit their recommendations to the PSC regarding  the new FP&L  
nuclear power plants proposed for Turkey point  south of Miami, Florida.

The recommendations are now scheduled for Monday,  March 10.
I will keep you posted.

Bob Krasowski
Florida
239-963-6285
_Alliance4cleanfl at aol.com_ (mailto:Alliance4cleanfl at aol.com)   

____________________________________

From: Minimushomines
To: nukenet at energyjustice.net
Sent: 3/5/2008  11:03:01 P.M. Eastern Standard Time
Subj: Wishful thinking?

Dear Friends and foes,

Tomorrow, March 6, the Florida Public Service Commission  Staff will make 
its' recommendation to the FPSC regarding the two New  Nuclear reactors FP&L 
proposed to build at Turkey Point,  south of Miami on Biscayne Bay. The proposed 
plants were the subject of  a formal PSC hearing on January 30, 31 and Feb. 1. 
Docket  070650.

Jan and I fully expect the staff to recommend denial of  the project for 
three main reasons. These were concerns prior to the  hearing and were addressed 
during the hearing by the only intervenors  against the proposal.

First, The population growth projections the  proponents based their need for 
the plant on have diminished  and are expected to remain soft into the 
extended future. The  economy does not need the drain.

II : Most relevant to the PSC - The potential of  efficiency strategies, 
investments in distributive energy - residential  commercial and agricultural and 
geothermal and renewable options have not  been fully, adequately evaluated, 
analyzed and compared to fossil, gas and  nuclear options. Therefore the 
nuclear proposals can not  move forward at this time. 

3, The pre pay arrangement newly enacted into law is  rightly perceived by 
the public as a tax and can not be justified until it  also applies equally to 
efficiency and clean renewables. The high risk  investment in the Nuclear 
plants may be better spent - twelve  to sixteen billion dollars for 2200 MW- over 
the course of the next ten  years invested in programs mentioned in part II. 
Detailed analysis must be  done to understand exactly how this might be done.

There is a slight chance that under great political and  special interest 
pressure the staff may unwittingly  perform benieth their usual high standard and 
 recommend approval.  Maybe with the suggestion that the scheduled annual 
economic  reviews will provide safe guards against the project going to far if  
conditions develop that show the project to be unadvisable. This  
recommendation is unlikely since conditions already exist  that show the project to be 
unadvisable. And we believe the staff  doesn't want to proceed with any program 
without doing due diligence on all  the options and combinations thereof.

We'll see.

Bob Krasowski
Florida
239-963-6285
_Alliance4cleanfl at aol.com_ (mailto:Alliance4cleanfl at aol.com)  

____________________________________
 It's Tax Time! _Get  tips, forms and advice on AOL Money &  Finance._ 
(http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolprf00030000000001) 

**************It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and advice on AOL Money & 
Finance.      (http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolprf00030000000001)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.energyjustice.net/pipermail/nukenet_energyjustice.net/attachments/20080309/8226e9ae/attachment.html 