http://www.recordonline.com/apps/pbc...NEWS/908210342

if they can forestall putting enough money into their decommissioning fund
they'll be borrowing money against the future at which point they'll call
upon the taxpayers to bail them out. borrowing from peter (future
taxpayers) to pay paul (the shareholders). another example of (bottom up)
"redistribution of wealth".

in the article they say "...there's no shortfall..." that is of course
unless the plant has to SHUT DOWN BEFORE it's scheduled to! why would they
want to have all that money tied up? paints a better picture for their
shareholders.

the typical point pro-nuke people concede to the anti-nuke people is
"nuclear waste disposal/storage", this is ANOTHER reason anti-nuke people
can grasp upon, the industry is resisting every which way to put away enough
money to responsibly decommission their plants. putting the burden on your
children and your children's children. it's a beauty scheme.


b.w.