McCain calls for 45 new Nuclear Reactors

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
StageLeft

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
His campaign is a losing proposition, but this I cannot argue with. Not even a little. I suppose my only complaint is it's not enough reactors, if the 104 here produce 20%. Hell, there are plants that burn oil. I want that for my darn car :)
 
palehorse

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
well damn... it's going to be very hard to argue with this point. About the only thing Obama could do to counter this absolutely brilliant idea would be to double the number (I hope he does! :)). If he comes out denouncing this idea, that's not going to go over very well at all.

Nice move McCain! :thumbsup:

Harvey> I wouldn't have guessed that you'd be against increasing the number of nuclear power plants... Why are you against this proposal?
 
M

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,138
6,617
126
The nuclear energy folk promise they will clean up their mess and they never have and never will. It's all great theory and leave the mess for our kids. Any nuclear projects should contain a genealogy of all supporters into the future so that future generations can exterminate their descendents. We need real nuclear accountability.
 
C

Carmen813

Diamond Member
May 18, 2007
3,189
0
76
I think we should beam the radiation to the moon. Who is with me!?

Either that or invest in fusion research...
 
B

bsobel

Moderator Emeritus<br>Elite Member
Dec 9, 2001
13,346
0
0
Originally posted by: Harvey
HELL NO! WE WON'T GLOW!

Fuck McSame yet again.
Click to expand...

I so wish you were kidding but know your not. We need new power sources that arent coal and aren't ng/oil, what else would you suggest?
 
palehorse

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
The nuclear energy folk promise they will clean up their mess and they never have and never will. It's all great theory and leave the mess for our kids. Any nuclear projects should contain a genealogy of all supporters into the future so that future generations can exterminate their descendents. We need real nuclear accountability.
Click to expand...

what "messes" are you referring to?
 
J

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,684
136
Meh. It's the usual putting the cart ahead of the horse, like cutting taxes w/o cutting spending.

From the article-

In an appearance before an audience at Missouri State University, McCain also said, "We will need to solve complex problems of moving and storing materials that will always need safeguarding."

Do that first, Mmkay?

 
sportage

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,492
3,162
136
Ok... So you are for it?
When they next need to dump the waste in you area, will you STILL be 100% on board?
Or, will you flip flop.
You know, dump the waste, ok .. but in "their" state, not mine.
Think about it...

PS. There is a reason N plants are on hold.
No one wanted the waste dumped in their state or neighborhood.
The cry against was so loud, the N plants were placed on hold.
Just wanting to build more is part one of a two part problem.
Mccain is, as usual, ignoring part two.

No one wants a dump site near their kids, schools, farm land, wild life, etc etc.
 
sportage

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,492
3,162
136
One thing about Obama, he DOES think the process clear thru.
Not just the typical knee jerk responses.

Same with oil drilling.
I lived in So. Ca. and having the beaches drenched with oil waste
from time to time was a nightmare.
It happened a lot!!!

Not massive spills, but miles of beach dotted with oil deposits from offshore drilling.
Try to take a stroll along a nice So Cal beach and end up with black oil stuck to
your feet. Not very pretty.
And thus, began the drilling ban.

There is a reason things are the way they are. And the laws are what they are.
And Obama thinks the issue thru.
 
C

Carmen813

Diamond Member
May 18, 2007
3,189
0
76
Originally posted by: sportage
Ok... So you are for it?
When they next need to dump the waste in you area, will you STILL be 100% on board?
Or, will you flip flop.
You know, dump the waste, ok .. but in "their" state, not mine.
Think about it...

PS. There is a reason N plants are on hold.
No one wanted the waste dumped in their state or neighborhood.
The cry against was so loud, the N plants were placed on hold.
Just wanting to build more is part one of a two part problem.
Mccain is, as usual, ignoring part two.

No one wants a dump site near their kids, schools, farm land, wild life, etc etc.
Click to expand...

Bacteria that eats nuclear waste
http://www.physorg.com/news6046.html
 
S

SkipBaldwin

Junior Member
Jun 18, 2008
15
0
0
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
The nuclear energy folk promise they will clean up their mess and they never have and never will. It's all great theory and leave the mess for our kids. Any nuclear projects should contain a genealogy of all supporters into the future so that future generations can exterminate their descendents. We need real nuclear accountability.
Click to expand...

Is this a less pressing issue than our economy being held hostage at the whim of the Middle East?
 
NikolaeVarius

NikolaeVarius

Lifer
Oct 25, 2006
11,036
11
91
Problem is, there isn't enough fissionable material on earth to fuel current energy needs for much more than 50 or so years.

We need fusion energy. However, for the short term, Fission is fine.
 
M

miketheidiot

Lifer
Sep 3, 2004
11,060
1
0
I wasn't aware that we had a shortage of electrical power.


Originally posted by: SkipBaldwin
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
The nuclear energy folk promise they will clean up their mess and they never have and never will. It's all great theory and leave the mess for our kids. Any nuclear projects should contain a genealogy of all supporters into the future so that future generations can exterminate their descendents. We need real nuclear accountability.
Click to expand...

Is this a less pressing issue than our economy being held hostage at the whim of the Middle East?
Click to expand...

because we get tons of oil from the middle east. (we don't)
 
K

KurskKnyaz

Senior member
Dec 1, 2003
880
1
81
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
The nuclear energy folk promise they will clean up their mess and they never have and never will. It's all great theory and leave the mess for our kids. Any nuclear projects should contain a genealogy of all supporters into the future so that future generations can exterminate their descendents. We need real nuclear accountability.
Click to expand...

what "messes" are you referring to?
Click to expand...

yeah, I have the same question. What messes? The biggest problem with nuclear reactors is warm water pollution not radioactive "messes".
 
N

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,808
83
91
someone needs to do a cost analysis of nuclear reactors/off-shore drilling versus invading northern Canada and stealing their oil.
 
K

KurskKnyaz

Senior member
Dec 1, 2003
880
1
81
Originally posted by: sportage
Ok... So you are for it?
When they next need to dump the waste in you area, will you STILL be 100% on board?
Or, will you flip flop.
You know, dump the waste, ok .. but in "their" state, not mine.
Think about it...

PS. There is a reason N plants are on hold.
No one wanted the waste dumped in their state or neighborhood.
The cry against was so loud, the N plants were placed on hold.
Just wanting to build more is part one of a two part problem.
Mccain is, as usual, ignoring part two.

No one wants a dump site near their kids, schools, farm land, wild life, etc etc.
Click to expand...

The limits of nuclear waste disposal are not the size but the heat the waste generates. No one is going to dump the waste near your kids. Coal energy would be far worse. The ash from the mining is a far bigger concern than nuclear waste. I never seen a school near a nuclear reactor. You are saying it like those are the only places where waste could be dumped.

Once again, another "environmentalists" with another fantasy. There is no 100% safe energy alternative but nuclear power is far safer and cleaner than coal. You people need to understand that when you live life you take risks. Arguing against nuclear power is like arguing against building a skyscraper because it poses a threat: terrorists can fly planes into it.
 
P

PELarson

Platinum Member
Mar 27, 2001
2,289
0
0
Originally posted by: Carmen813
I think we should beam the radiation to the moon. Who is with me!?

Either that or invest in fusion research...
Click to expand...

Yeah but we better not have any bases on the moon when the Nuclear waste blows up and sends the moon travelling through space.

Seriously.

It is kinda funny that the President that really understood nuclear power put solar panels on the White House.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom