McCain said (from the article):

"Across Europe there are 197 reactors in operation, and nations including France and Belgium derive more than half their electricity from nuclear power. And if all of these nations can find a way to carry out great goals in energy policy, then I assure you that the United States is more than equal to the challenge."

I think that comment justs says it all. Liberals always use Europe, especially France, when pushing thier social programs, but now someone wants to benchmark then in energy they complain about it.

Actually, he said he would add 100, and devote $2 billion to clean coal programs.

I honestly don't know where these libs think our new energy needs will be coming from. They seem to think that just by trading in our Hummers for a Prius, we'll be set. It ain't so. It's the "no nukes" crowd that's brought us 20 million tons of new coal burned every year, it's the NIMBY crowd that's brought us $4 gasoline, and they're telling us to listen to them for another generation. And there's nothing Obama's done on the subject to make me think he's anything more than another demagogue.

Well, whatever happens, we'll deserve the president we get in 2009, and the energy bills we get in the mail in 2019.

"it's the NIMBY crowd that's brought us $4 gasoline"

Forgive me if I call bullshit on your tired theory. Consumption and production haven't changed significantly in the past year, yet prices are up 50%.

"it's the NIMBY crowd that's brought us $4 gasoline"

Forgive me if I call bullshit on your tired theory. Consumption and production haven't changed significantly in the past year, yet prices are up 50%.

Sorry bout the double. Slow network.

Someone please build 1500 new reactors and 2000 new refineries and start today. Then when gas is $25/gallon 5 years from now, what will the right say then? More reactors? More refineries? Bigger subsidies to the oil companies?
How much has consumption and production REALLY changed to cause this three fold increase in the price of gas since 2000?
Gas is never going to be reasonably priced again...never...never...never.

what does the senile fuck plan to do with waste? he'll be dead by the time we need to bury it in utah....

I live right between two Nuclear facilities (east coast of Lake Michigan). One is about 12 miles south and the other is about 8 miles north.

You almost do not know that they are there from the road. They are great employers and the taxes the local communities get are great.

I am for building all that can be built.

We need to diversify. I believe that is the mistake we have made. We have relied too heavily on oil. Those who fault Reagan and Bush and Clinton are all correct.

We need to drill for oil, build nuclear plants, fund clean coal research, solar, wind, bio, any and all.

Obama and libs, untrained in chemmistry and thermodynamics will oppose domestic drilling, more nuclear plants and clean coal and yet still think that some magic alternative energy will save us like cars that run on water.

will oppose domestic drilling

You do know that currently only 25% of the public land under lease to oil and gas companies have any drilling going on.

Opening new lands will not fix the supply problem.

it's the NIMBY crowd that's brought us $4 gasoline, and they're telling us to listen to them for another generation. And there's nothing Obama's done on the subject to make me think he's anything more than another demagogue.

Well, whatever happens, we'll deserve the president we get in 2009, and the energy bills we get in the mail in 2019.

Posted by rightisright at 2008-06-19 08:13 AM | Reply | Flag:

You must have bumped your head recently.

I was paying 1.54 per gallon in 1999-2000. After Bush's election and Cheney secret energy policy meetings, I'm now paying 4.19 per gallon. You're right though......those DAMN LIBS must be to blame!!

I'm now paying 4.19 per gallon. You're right though......those DAMN LIBS must be to blame!!

Posted by COMMONSENSE at 2008-06-19 02:22 PM |

Those damn libs campaigned on lowering gas prices in 2006. Those damn libs cheered Clinton when he banned off shore oil drilling.

I see nothing wrong with Nuclear Reactors as long as they're of the new 'Pebble Bed' design. Very safe, highly efficient with very little waste fuel....and they create tons of clean hydrogen in the process.

Also, the most unsafe piece of a Nuclear Reactor is the corporation that is running it. They cut corners where they can and lobby for less regulation. This needs to stop if the public is going to once again put it's trust in nuclear energy.

I just want a pony.

Obama and libs, untrained in chemmistry and thermodynamics will oppose domestic drilling, more nuclear plants and clean coal and yet still think that some magic alternative energy will save us like cars that run on water.

Posted by fwthom at 2008-06-19 02:12 PM | Reply | Flag:


Clean Coal....another CON myth.


You can stand downwind of a coal plant and a geiger counter will go crazy.

Clean? Unlikely.

45 new nuke plants.

Okay, as long as McCain builts them all in his home state of Arizona.

YEAH!

And why no mention of the 160 some odd refineries that have voluntarily closed their doors since 1980?

Why because it's impossible to explain why as these refineries were being closed they simultaneously increased in capacity and output in an industry that kept saying it needed to "expand" because of a lack of capacity!

Yup, he makes perfect sense ---- if you're a shut in (or are like blt who willfully ignores reality in favor of some alternate, self enforcing fantasy)!

I'm a "flaming fucking damn lib" and I'm for new nuclear power. McCain is right. We need to pull out all the stops, lessen the pain of the energy crisis and find new, innovative ways to create energy for the future.

We should have been putting money into innovation 10+ years ago, but we didn't, and we're going to have to tear up wildlife because of our inaction. Offshore drilling has been banned for 20+ years, it wasn't Clinton who banned it.

YEAH!

Aint no Nuclear Power Plant gonna fill up your car. Unless of course it's an Electric car, something the "right" swears will destroy the American auto industry Executives Pay Day.

Oh what to do now!

American Nuclear Regulations fill a large conference table, which is no substitute for common sense. The process to date has been an unmitigated economic disaster. Many from that Industry moved into Environmental Engineering, leaving cost-benefit analysis forgotten.

Safe Nuclear technology requires a peaceful world. Economical Nuclear Power Development requires a major restructuring of Government beauracracy, especially our Judicial Branch. What are the chances? Otherwise it will just become another excuse to fuck the consumer.

But at today's prices viable alternative generation projects could be everywhere. Will the free market conservatives let them die again if anyone assumes the risks and steps forward with the cash? That all depends on how well they're tied into the usual crooks and liars that run this country. The elites gotcha coming and going.

Aint no Nuclear Power Plant gonna fill up your car. Unless of course it's an Electric car, something the "right" swears will destroy the American auto industry Executives Pay Day.

Oh what to do now!

Posted by Redneckville at 2008-06-19 02:39 PM |

Oil consumption only amounts to about 30 percent in regards to autos. What about the other seventy percent used in our manufactoring? Is it that far a stretch to run our plants on nuclear power?

You know, facts are such bitches.

The president made no mention of his father, President George H.W. Bush, who banned coastal oil exploration in 1990, or his brother, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who long opposed it.


How long did his father ban the exploration? Until 2002? Then what? Clinton EXTENDED the ban as well as other ares not included. No date on those. You are right facts are a bitch. Maybe you should read them first.

Industry has already decided they aren't gonna let you have an electric car, until they squeezed every last cent out of oil. Once that's over with, they'll let you have their battery technology, for their non-negotiable price.

Even Obama is in favor of building nuclear (see if any libs praise him for the idea).

Good. Build the plants. But build them safely. I don't want the same crooked assholes that fucked up public companies because of greed builing them.

I don't know if a partnership between corporations and government is the answer here, but the lasting effects are much too important to leave to the get it done as cheaply as possible crowd.

YEAH!

Here is an idea! Let's take those gazillions of Tax dollars mcunt and the "right" so desperately want to hand over to the Energy Companies as MORE welfare and give it to the homeowner so that they may best decide what to do with it!

Wouldn't that be a more in line with Real Conservative Values!

They could blow it on Chinese garbage, or they could reinsulat their homes, install a geothermal system, maybe a gasification system, or a system akin to a rumitory system for the home production of methane from lawn cutting as vegetable scraps and or develop better solar concentration techniques and better storage devices! That way we could actually fulfill that bullshit line the Fake Plastic Sons of Bitchs are always talking up --- "Individual Choice"!

Maybe even take an existing infrastructure (like the interstate system) and come up with a way to capture all that energy that rolls up and down the 24/7!

Or, we could just reevaluate how we use energy and start to be wiser consumers of it!

But no, they are just eager to dive in loot some more of the public trust --- not solve a single problem as demonstrated by them for the last twelve years running!

How long did his father ban the exploration? Until 2002? Then what? Clinton EXTENDED the ban as well as other ares not included.

Exactly right, but hey lets gloss over the fact the Jeb and HW Bush were against the coastal exploration, and lets gloss over the fact that less than a quarter of oil and gas leased land have any drilling going on and focus on talking points instead!

What about the other seventy percent used in our manufacturing?

YEAH!

Why seed oils of course.

Plastics can be synthesized out of hemp seeds, just as an example!

Personally, I don't care whose fault it is that we're in this mess. The question is, what now? The answer is more energy, not less. From more sources, not fewer. But the left is consumed with the idea that you can merely conserve your way to energy independence, which is so preposterous it staggers the imagination. It couldn't possibly work.

The answer is in the ground all around us. The US is the Saudi Arabia of coal, and nuclear power should be the key energy source of the future, as we take more and more of our transporation and put it onto the grid.

McCain won't be president, and so far all Obama has done is proposed measures that keep growth down, energy prices high, and the fuel imports coming.

I one way the Republicans are solving our energy problems in a very efficient manner. By destroying our economy our enegy consumption will continue to drop, the poorer we become the less energy we will consume. Who would have thought that Dumbya would end up being a conservationist.

fact that less than a quarter of oil and gas leased land have any drilling going on and focus on talking points instead!


YEAH!

I totally forgot about the 560 million acres of CURRENT leases in the continental USA that the Oil companies aren't doing a thing with!

They have right now leases on land equaling the size of Two States --- that are just sitting there idle!

The US is the Saudi Arabia of coal, and nuclear power should be the key energy source of the future, as we take more and more of our transporation and put it onto the grid.

Posted by rightisright

Coal... right... so we can become as polluted as china.

Nuclear? Well if those plants existed solely in the reddest of red state America, I might be able to cosign on that idea.

By destroying our economy our enegy consumption will continue to drop, the poorer we become the less energy we will consume.

Here I thought the dems were in power. Hell they even campaigned their way to both Houses lying about lowering gas prices. Great job Nancy.

Who's gonna build all those new nuke plants?
Halliburton??
KBR?
screw the whole lot of 'em!
What's needed is MORE control over how plants are built-not less.

Tell ya wot crispee, let's have Halliburton build one in your front yard-without all those pesky "regulations"...then let KBR build one in your back yard, without regulations...


I wonder-how long before you and yours would start to glow in the dark?

and so far all Obama has done is proposed measures that keep growth down, energy prices high, and the fuel imports coming.

YEAH!

Vs. Bush's actual doing (relative to obamas "proposing")!

Are you pretending Bush hasn't been the president for the past eight years again?
The President that oversaw a 267% increase in fuel prices during his tenure?

Anyway, why aren't you slobbering and demanding that the industries currently held leases be worked before securing more?
That is only if your serious about that "what now" and just not pretending to care because it serves the Corporate Welfare System Bush spent so much effort preserving!

I wonder-how long before you and yours would start to glow in the dark?

Posted by frankf55

Not soon enough for my tastes.

The libs have to be right on this one don't even try. All energy sources are bad unless it is China drilling in the gulf. For Gods sake watch your spelling they have no valid argument so spelling is the main battle field. Sure hope I spelled that right or was it left.

Frank, (No field five)

Is there any reason you went the Haliburton/KBR talking point? I know it is common for libs to blame everything they can on these American companies. But where was the opening for this line about who builds them and or how?

"I totally forgot about the 560 million acres of CURRENT leases in the continental USA that the Oil companies aren't doing a thing with!"


Oops!

I overstated the number of acres --- by over 500 million! My bad!

"I totally forgot about the 560 million acres of CURRENT leases in the continental USA that the Oil companies aren't doing a thing with!

They have right now leases on land equaling the size of Two States --- that are just sitting there idle!" - Red

Your right, I totally forgot, everywhere we drill we find oil, and lots of it...

I've worked in the environmental field for a long time. These kinds of issues really aren't democrat vs. republican issues.

Most people like nuclear power, in theory, they just don't want to live near a reactor. When one gets proposed, there is nearly always a grass roots opposition to it from locals (esp. since 1979). Regardless of how safe they are, there is the perception that they are unsafe, and this nearly always impacts property values. Personally, I'd rather risk a chance of a meltdown, than inhale heavy metals released from a coal power plant for decades on end. This isn't really a democrat vs. a republican kind of a problem; for all those that blame the liberals, don't you remember how much pandering BOTH Bush and Kerry did back in '04 about where to dispose of nuclear waste?

As for drilling in ANWAR and the Gulf Coast... Personally, I could potentially support additional drilling on federal land, if it was part of an actual energy plan to wean of off of foreign oil and if the oil was used solely in the US.

As for the Gulf Coast, we don't allow drilling because of political pressure from the Gulf States. Most of these states aren't exactly liberal bastions.

Your right, I totally forgot, everywhere we drill we find oil, and lots of it...
Posted by AndreaMackris at 2008-06-19 03:22 PM


YEAH!

It's common for businesses of this caliber to select new sights all Willie Nillie without employing geologists and stuff like that!

Hell, just the other day a mining operation wanted to open a new rock quarry and they decided on a locale by simply closing their eyes and fingering a map without any consideration if it had any rock there in the first place!

Talk about "No Facts and Only Hyperbole"!

Geez, think of all the muslim testicles McSame could fry with 45 nukes!

This election is looking more and more like it was lifted from the last season of West Wing.

I think that comment justs says it all. Liberals always use Europe, especially France, when pushing thier social programs, but now someone wants to benchmark then in energy they complain about it.


So you're in favor of a large tax increase on gas and diesel to fund roads, mass transit and socialized medicine?

Can't have it both ways....

it's the NIMBY crowd that's brought us $4 gasoline

That'd be the same NIMBY crowd that was around 5 short years ago when the price of oil was less than a quarter it is now?

And you give investment advice?

"So you're in favor of a large tax increase on gas and diesel to fund roads, mass transit and socialized medicine?"


That would reduce oil consumption! Who's in favor of that? Knucklehead.

I'm for nuclear power plants. Go for it.

It's hilarious. The same fuckers that demonize Europe for being "socialist" say look to Europe for energy policy. Maybe these people should be called cafeteria capitalists.

Nuclear power will be a good idea when the people regulating the industry aren't the same ones that hate government regulation.

it's the NIMBY crowd that's brought us $4 gasoline

That'd be the same NIMBY crowd that was around 5 short years ago when the price of oil was less than a quarter it is now?

* * * *

Um, I don't really see what one has to do with the other, but yeah. California imports almost all their electricity, and practically all their oil. Yet they pretend to be outraged at the fact that the country as a whole isn't energy-independent. They want all that stuff somewhere else, just not near them. Don't tell the Hollywood set to cut back on their fuel consumption, though--that's for chumps.

Those living on the coast can't stand the idea of a few drops of oil washing ashore. Millions of others are still hiding under their beds after seeing "The China Syndrome"--30 years ago--so the idea of more nuke plants isn't even up for conversation. Coal? What--do you want to wind up like China? So, here we are.

I don't personally care much. I can afford gasoline at twice today's prices, and it wouldn't affect me at all. But for all the people on fixed incomes and lower wages--you know, the ones Dems pretend to care about--what is their plan to bring more energy online?

Cue the crickets.

Yep things have really cooled down in the gas game since the democrats took over the house and senate. What relief!!!!

Just looking at the comments on this blog you can see that NOTHING will get done because either side just wants to blame the other! It's not only on energy but everything else. Until both sides can give a little bit nothing but bitching will happen. Whatever happened to being American's and doing best for the country and not some political party.

As a public works program, it would deliver a big economic boost; as an alternative energy program, there are potentially better programs, and this is not going to make many people happy. Theoretically, all these plants could be built, but how many sites that are remote enough to not create a potential 3-Mile Island or Chernobyl risk to a lot of people? And even when they are remote, as 3 Mile Island and Chernobyl were, radiation from a plant accident spreads very far and wide. You just don't get that type of risk from solar or wind or geothermal or marine tidal power generation. I think R&D on those areas adn on battery storage technologies could use some of the funds "Go Nuclear" McCain would earmark for nukes.

As a public works program, it would deliver a big economic boost; as an alternative energy program, there are potentially better programs, and this is not going to make many people happy. Theoretically, all these plants could be built, but how many sites that are remote enough to not create a potential 3-Mile Island or Chernobyl risk to a lot of people? And even when they are remote, as 3 Mile Island and Chernobyl were, radiation from a plant accident spreads very far and wide. You just don't get that type of risk from solar or wind or geothermal or marine tidal power generation. I think R&D on those areas and on battery storage technologies could use some of the funds "Go Nuclear" McCain would earmark for nukes.

Nuclear is preferable to fossils; Always has been.
They just never had the lobbyists of Big Oil.
(Or Big Ag for that matter.)

Those damn libs campaigned on lowering gas prices in 2006. Those damn libs cheered Clinton when he banned off shore oil drilling.

Posted by crispee_oc at 2008-06-19 02:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

Why wouldn't Jeb Bush allow it off of FL then?

"cheered Clinton when he banned off shore oil drilling"

That was Bush 1.

Good work Nancy!! When you said you were going to be working on high energy prices, I guess we kinda misunderstood you. Our bad!

Posted by rightisright at 2008-06-19 04:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

You're right....we should have kept up the Republican Congressional ways.......giving 14 billion dollars of our tax dollars to them during times of record profit. Several weeks after we handed over 14 BILLION of our tax dollars to these companies, ExxonMobil gave their CEO a 450 million dollar retirement package....and that's fine with you righties....because it's only 'welfare' when it's the 'darkies' that are getting it.

Personally, I don't care whose fault it is that we're in this mess. The question is, what now? The answer is more energy, not less. From more sources, not fewer. But the left is consumed with the idea that you can merely conserve your way to energy independence, which is so preposterous it staggers the imagination. It couldn't possibly work.


Posted by rightisright at 2008-06-19 02:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

"But the left is consumed with the idea that you can merely conserve your way to energy independence,"

Really? Where are you when people on here refer to Prius owners as 'latte-sipping faggots'?

Where are you when rednecks on here ridicule the idea of Hemp (not THC) as a biomass.

Where are you when Wind and Solar is brought up only to be ridiculed as some 'stupid hippy idea'.


It seems you really have no idea what you're talking about.....and oh, I loved this part:

"Personally, I don't care whose fault it is that we're in this mess."

That's just great. Attack the 'libs' for the past 8 years and then, when shown to be completely wrong, say something stupid like "Well, I don't care whose fault it is"

You seemed to care right up until you were made to look like an ass.

Must be convenient to be you. FLIP FLOP

"Now we're up to $3.56 per gallon -- an increase of an additional $2.05 per gallon."

RisR tries but fails to blame Nancy Pelosi for the increase in gas prices. Puhleeeeez do tell how she is responsible when everyone that is even halfway honest will admit that Republicans in the Senate can and do effectively block any piece of legislation that Dems propose. RisR you are going to have to get new talking points these old ones are wearing awfully thin.

Um, Danni--I cut and pasted a link. Pelosi thought that lower energy prices would come as soon as Democrats started running things. What she didn't realize--and still doesn't, probably--is that what happens in Washington doesn't really matter much in the short term. If you're going to blame Bush for higher fuel costs from 2001 through 2006, seems she should shoulder some of the blame for 2007 to the present.

But the problem is bigger than Ms. Pelosi's brain. It's from years of neglect, from the enviros to Detroit to the American consumer, on both the supply and the demand side.

And it's true that the libs have us in this mess on the supply side, and it's also true that the conservatives have us in this mess on the demand side.

So, what now?

Oops. Last part of the post didn't take.

But does anyone really believe that Obama's silly tax increase on energy producers will result in lower prices? Or his insistence on continuing this disastrous ethanol program, which hasn't dented fuel prices at all, but has caused soaring prices in foods and base grains?

Come on, libbies. Show me you're smarter than Obama's talking points to California and Palm Beach.

"Or his insistence on continuing this disastrous ethanol program, which hasn't dented fuel prices at all, but has caused soaring prices in foods and base grains?"

Agreed. Now go tell it to Republican politicians who also support ethanol, like John McBush.

Europe is getting that many along with clean burning coal. What do they know that we don't? Nothing. We have Democrats dictating our energy policy is the only difference.

""Um, Danni--I cut and pasted a link.""

Yeah, to a blog opinion by this guy....

"Posted by Brian Faughnan on April 25, 2008"

A pathetic attempt to shift the blame from the oil crony Bush. As you even admitted yesterday the falling value of the dollar is probably most responsible for the increase in gas prices though some of us believe speculators are the reason for the tremendous spike during the past few months.
One person who is definitely not to blame is the Speaker of the House who has had not power to change anything in the entire equation of gas prices and you know it.
Like I said....that was just partisan hackery.

"We have Democrats dictating our energy policy is the only difference."

There weren't even any Democrats allowed into the secret energy meetings led by Cheney. Bush and Republicans have dictated energy policy since 2000....but don't let that stop you from making an ass of yourself.

RiR,

You are so full of shit. US consumption is down 1% since last year and this trend has probably decreased faster than the Government will report it.

Want lower gasoline prices?
1. Stop oil speculation (50% of the problem)
2. Stop ALL the Middle East Wars (25% of the problem)
3. Strengthen the dollar (25% of the problem)

Governments, CEOs and Economists ALL agree on this.

"the "no nukes" crowd" = Big Oil.

Posted by Zatoichi

That is a huge pile of smelly bull shit. Think back to the late 70s and early 80s and then tell me who raised all the shit about nuk plants.

The single biggest thing that killed nuke plants here in the US was that movie "China Syndrome".

Well, yeah, that movie and that little inconvenient nonevent at Three Mile Island.

What was the bad thing that happened at TMI???? The plant shut down like it was supose to and some dumb shit thought he knew better. No one was killed and no one was hurt. What is the problem.

There have been 3 death from a nuclear accident in the US and that happened back in 1961 with a little portable reactor they built for the Army. The thing was a CF.

Nuke Power, wind power, solar power, coal to gas, hydroelectric will help us! We need all we can get to get away from big oil sticking it to us every day!

John McInsane wants 45 new nuke plants?

No surprises there.

Trouble with nuke plants is the unsolvable problem of wot to do with all the nuclear waste. The current system of driving it around on trucks in the middle of the night along public roads in order to leave it at one of the already overfilled and diminishing-in-number of dump sites is dangerous.

Turning nuclear waste into depleted uranium munitions is NOT a viable option either, btw.

R&D into clean power and figuring out ways to take oil outta the manufacturing stream are both viable options.

Be Well.

Want lower gasoline prices?
1. Stop oil speculation (50% of the problem)
2. Stop ALL the Middle East Wars (25% of the problem)
3. Strengthen the dollar (25% of the problem)

Governments, CEOs and Economists ALL agree on this.

Posted by nutcase
* * * *

Wow. Isn't that funny? I read reports from governments, CEO's, and Economists all the time, and I've never seen this. Nicely broken down into percentages and everything!

I defer to your obviously superior wisdom, but have 2 questions:

1. How does speculation cause higher prices? I could argue pretty forcefully that over time they cause lower prices--after all, why did crude go down today? Hell, for that matter, why does it EVER go down, if speculators are half the market?

2. Just how does one go about ending ALL Middle East wars? Maybe you never bothered to pick up a newspaper before Bush was president, but the Middle East has been unstable since mankind figured out how to put written words on a tablet. They've been fighting ever since. Hopefully we'll have some relief on energy prices sometime before the Jews and the Muslims can go years without trying to slaughter each other.

2. Just how does one go about ending ALL Middle East wars? Maybe you never bothered to pick up a newspaper before Bush was president, but the Middle East has been unstable since mankind figured out how to put written words on a tablet. They've been fighting ever since. Hopefully we'll have some relief on energy prices sometime before the Jews and the Muslims can go years without trying to slaughter each other.

Posted by rightisright at 2008-06-20 12:02 AM | Reply | Flag

No worries! Today Bush said he is confident that he'll have a peace treaty signed by the time he leaves office in 7 months. RIIIIIIGHT!

Let's hope he's not using the 'Roadmap To Peace' he used in 2003.

I swear the liberals on this site are just political hacks! The most liberal, bush hating people in this country are ALL FOR NUKE PLANTS.

Do you know who the fuck Carl Pope is?

he is as left as you can get, and he wants Nuke powerplants in droves.

Partisanship aside, Nuke power plants is the best way to go, bar none, no argument.

Europe, the model of the left, has more than anyone. Its a no brainer.

Libs are with McCain on this one, if you don't admit it, then fuck off and die.

Obama has 0 backbone, and won't take a position, because thats what typical democrats do, they wait for polls, then make a choice. Obama is a fucking weak leader.

Its already know, the majority of libs AND the majority of conservatives back McCains plan.

Again, if you can't admit it, fuck you.

Kuma

Theoretically, all these plants could be built, but how many sites that are remote enough to not create a potential 3-Mile Island or Chernobyl risk to a lot of people?

Posted by townncountry at 2008-06-19 05:00 PM | Reply

The place to build new nukes is next to existing ones. They are already permitted and have support infrastructure in place.

Since the US has been out of the nuke business for so long, the mostly realistic approach would be to buy modern "pocket nukes" from Japan. These are small plants pre-assembled

regarding where could these plants be built, my back yard would be ok. seriously this country has an abundance of isolated areas.
comache oeak built outside of glen rose texas has been the greatest thing ever to happen to that area. and now we have natural gas wells being drilled in our area. i even get lease money and royalties for my small lot in town.

mostly realistic approach would be to buy modern "pocket nukes" from Japan.

So you are advocating Many Mini Nukes?

Of course this being a college town we have a small band of professional protesters who would chain themselves to the gates at Calloway. Personally I think given a few days they'd get hungry and leave, but they always arrest them and a local lawyer bails them out.

The place to build new nukes is next to existing ones. They are already permitted and have support infrastructure in place. ~ Vern

I like that idea. Bravo! (Seriously.)

Vern, Of course, there are some plants that are now too close to major population centers, and I would hope that those wouldn't be on the expansion list. A big problem is that remote sites are going to lose some energy in transporting the power long distances. But it could be part of a national growth policy for less-densely populates stretched within the country's rural areas: practically free nuke energy + developing PHEV technology for farm vehicles and the profitability of heartland ag and industry could go way up.

RiR,

The Saudis, Exxon's CEO, Nader, Paul Craig Roberts all calculate that the dollars decline and mideast instability make oil woth about $65/barrel oil in the marketplace. This position is calculated using historical data and assumptions, which work until we reach peak oil. They know how much oil is being consumed, the dollar has declined, how much oil is being stored in anticipation of another conflict, how much Iraqi production has declined and Suadi production has increased. Their models spit out an expectd price.

Then Bernanke enters the playing field, facing another Wall Street Collapse. He prints money like there's no tommorrow and passes sit out to Investment Bankers, Hedge Funds for next to nothing. What do they do with this cheap paper? With housing and manufacturing in the tank, they pour it into oil futures. Voila, inflation raises its ugly head.

This energy catastrophy bears a striking resemblance to the California Energy Crisis. Those in a position of power (money is power) are gambling while the public bears all the risks. You don't have to buy a new house, car or I-Pod, but food, water, and energy are a different story. For most American's no gasoline, no job. These unnecessary fuckwad middlemen can hold out for any price and we will have to pay. They are doing just that in order to prevent bankruptcy. Bernanke is bailing these fuckers out of the housing crisis on the backs of working Americans. Like Enron, they should have been left to go bankrupt. How will we pay? Through Inflation, the tax which is never called a tax.

But for the United States and Israel there would be little or no Middle East Conflicts. Its not so much that they all love eachother as much as it is their abiltiy to wage war is and has always been fairly limited. US, Chinese and Russian weaponry is all they have. China and Russia didn't start this mess. But they feel the need to respond to our aggressive interference in Arab life.

To bring Peace to the Middle East STOP ISRAELI AGGRESSION. Make it clear we will not support their stealing of land and water. Make them return to their 1948 borders and return water flow into Jordan, Labanon and Syria.

Consumption and production haven't changed significantly in the past year, yet prices are up 50%.

Posted by Jomama at 2008-06-19 10:06 AM | Reply | Fl


uh......you might need to ask this question.
what is the name of the huge country with the billions and billions of people who are now driving fossil fuel powered cars by the millions and millions where they used to walk or ride bikes?

what does the senile fuck plan to do with waste? he'll be dead by the time we need to bury it in utah....

Posted by badgerwest at


the senile fuck might just know a little more about it than you do, fact is, a household on nuclear power uses waste for the basic life of the home and the waste will fill up a coke can.

one more time......THE FUCKIN FRENCH HAVE NUKES ALL OVER THE PLACE>......and WE CANT FIGURE IT OUT>.....

Someone please build 1500 new reactors and 2000 new refineries and start today. Then when gas is $25/gallon 5 years from now, what will the right say then? More reactors? More refineries? Bigger subsidies to the oil companies?
How much has consumption and production REALLY changed to cause this three fold increase in the price of gas since 2000?
Gas is never going to be reasonably priced again...never...never...never.

Posted by evilpolock at


you may be absolutely correct.....BUT we have said all along that newer forms of energy HAVE To be developed. an example I use all the time.
I remember watching jfk telling us that we would have a man on the moon before the end of a decade and everyone said......yeah sure........and WE DID IT....surely SOMEONE can figure out a car that will go far enough on some other energy form.....with incentives of course.

and then there is us......IF THE GOVERNMENT WONT HELP US WITH PRICES< we have a unique position on this issue.....we drive less, we use less, THE PRICE COMES DOWN..........

You do know that currently only 25% of the public land under lease to oil and gas companies have any drilling going on.

Opening new lands will not fix the supply problem.

Posted by 726 at


and you DO KNOW why that is of course...

on the other parts of those leases.......THEY DIDNT FIND OIL.....they buy leases after research but that research DOESNT MAKE IT A SURE THING......
and I dont say that you are lying, just that you are sucking the ass of every democrat liberal who WANTS DESPERATELY FOR GAS TO STAY HIGH AND EVEN HIGHER> while they spread the news that its republicans fault.......
I will give you good odds that IF obama is elected that two things for sure will be happening.

SOCIAL SECURITY will be in desperate trouble even though it wasnt under bush

and.......gas prices will be a problem and the DAMN OIL COMPANIES WILL HAVE TO BECOME NATIONALIZED......and chavez might even be brought in as an advisor.......well if castro cant make the party.......

Nuclear is preferable to fossils; Always has been.
They just never had the lobbyists of Big Oil.
(Or Big Ag for that matter.)

Posted by Zatoichi


AW FUCK AND HELL.........


here I was in a foul mood ready to take on the LIBERAL FUCKS In the world and here you go and say something that actually makes sense.
SHIT!!!

HOWEVER< you leave the MAJOR PROBLEM with the issue. environmental wackos who got thier panties in a wad all because of a movie and mario cumo

Just looking at the comments on this blog you can see that NOTHING will get done because either side just wants to blame the other! It's not only on energy but everything else. Until both sides can give a little bit nothing but bitching will happen. Whatever happened to being American's and doing best for the country and not some political party.

Posted by JLBEXACTO416

yeah you are probably right as well, but I dont see why all forms of energy cant be on the table. the left says NO To drilling.....the right says drill
the left says no to more nukes....the right says yes to nukes......(ALL IN GENERALALTIES< OF COURSE)_ what I think is that if all forms are worked on, then both sides get what they want and doesnt that mean that the country will be on thier way to energy independence. CLINTON DID NOTHING IN EIGHT YEARS>
BUSH DID LITTLE MORE THAN GIVE SOME SPEECHES....

SO........what now?

Trouble with nuke plants is the unsolvable problem of wot to do with all the nuclear waste. The current system of driving it around on trucks in the middle of the night along public roads in order to leave it at one of the already overfilled and diminishing-in-number of dump sites is dangerous.

Turning nuclear waste into depleted uranium munitions is NOT a viable option either, btw.

R&D into clean power and figuring out ways to take oil outta the manufacturing stream are both viable options.

Be Well.

Posted by dethspud


we are hearing now that there are new ways to reduce all of it

AND last talking head I heard related this waste to that of coal plants and coal usage and the larger amount and damage of coal was hugely more.......does that sound about right?

Spud, BLT, here's what the Russkies have been doing with their nuke waste -- Dumping it off the Kola Peninsula near Norway! See: news.bbc.co.uk

Way to go comrades! Just heating up that Arctic Ocean the Natural way -- with hot nukes! Right (sarcastism intended)!

er, "sarcasm intended"

er, "sarcasm intended"

Don't worry. I don't think zat's up yet. *grin*

Well, almost everyday in June in seattle has been rain and record lows.

Of course, there are some plants that are now too close to major population centers, and I would hope that those wouldn't be on the expansion list.

Posted by townncountry at 2008-06-20 10:03 AM | Reply

You're locked into the idea that nukes are inherently dangerous and so must be placed in rural Nevada. Fact is, there are no isolated places in Japan, and their reactors operate just fine in urban areas.

Even TMI functioned as it was supposed to. Based on 1950s design.

There is a ready market for post-reactor material, in health care, manufacturing and a number of other areas. The problem we face is that Carter made the US government the sole legal buyer, so all of it is in the hands of the Dept. of Energy.

Meanwhile, American companies are buying waste-based products from France and Japan. We're importing waste because we can't get access to our own.

Every issue, every problem goes like this on this site: BLAW... BLAW, BLAW... BUSH.. BLAW... BLAW, BLAW, BLAW....BUSH.... BLAW ,BLAW, BUSH...

I guess the President has ALL the power! Give it a FUCKING REST.
Your dream may come true. I honestly believe you whiny people will be blaming Bush in 2040. If this were Texas hold'em you could say you socialists are "all in". No problem. The American people don't have to "Call". The cards that come up will determine how we play the next hand.

"accumulated debts" and "25.99 percent"

Not paying it off every month? 100's of thousands?

That's sheer incompetence! I mean that, no snark at all.

Wow.

If McCain wants more Nukes let him break ground on one right in his backyard, I lived near a nuclear power plant no big deal. They should build them as long as they can find a way to deal with the waste. They could do that than we would be set re: electricity but it still doesn't help the price of gas these days. At least Georgie kept his word and made his oil buddies a lot of money while he was president.

45? It should be 47.

"I honestly believe you whiny people will be blaming Bush in 2040."

So? You right-wing cocksuckers still blame Clinton for everything. Suck it.

"So? You right-wing cocksuckers still blame Clinton for everything. Suck it."

Well said.