8 Comments so far

1. ezeflyer March 17th, 2007 10:09 am

   No nukes. Vote Green Party.

2. No LNG March 17th, 2007 10:57 am

   The energy lobby — whether nuke or oil or LNG can’t be directly beaten or outspent. They always have more. And because they are willing to lie and pander and prostitute themselves, they will always win where the object is to curry favor.

   They count on a natural human drive to accumulate and display wealth: a drive that is appropriate and adaptive in some evolutionary circumstances, but not when it leads to degradation of everything as now when 6 billion people (soon to be 9billion) all want to be wealthy consumers and drive 160mph in their mercedes’ on the autobahn.

   The more those folks have, the more they take. The only strategy I know is to keep saying no, we don’t need that, then live a life of less need.

3. mary nisbet March 17th, 2007 11:23 am

   Dear Diane,

   Thank you for your writing on CommonDreams
   about Nuclear plants and Patrick Moore.
   I wanted to ask if you have heard Dr.
   Bill Wattenburg? He is retired from
   Lawrence Livermore Lab. in Ca and has talk
   show on week-ends. He is very much pro-
   nuclear power and talks often of Patrick
   Moore. He is on KGO in San Francisco on
   Sat & Sun at 10 to 1 p.m. I can’t listen
   to him anymore but you ought to to hear
   his “comments” about the “eco-freaks”.

   Thanks,
   Mary Nisbet, Ca

4. Chuck Cliff March 18th, 2007 2:29 pm

   Just like “depleted uranium”, the term “nuclear power” is a misnomer with built in disinformation.

   There is no such thing as “nuclear power”.

   There is “wind power” and “water power”, but I have never heard anyone refer to “coal power”.

   The reason is that the kinetic evergy in wind and falling water is DIRECTLY transfered to turbines which generate electricity.

   With coal powerED, oil powerED and fission powerED plants the transfer is indirect.

   This technology is and will never be economically sustainable when ALL the costs to enviroment and human health are factored in.

   The motivation for “nuclear power” has roots in America’s bad conscience over being the only nation, to date, that has used nuclear weapons of mass destruction on a human population.

5. prog-rocks March 19th, 2007 11:10 pm

   I have nothing against nuclear energy - but I do have something against nuclear energy companies.

   That is the crux of the problem. This is a powerful technology that could actually do some good in combination with REAL GREEN TECHNOLOGY. The problem is that nuclear power companies want to run a profit in an industry with insane overhead and lots of legacy problems, and compete against themselves? As most nuclear companies either have an interest in or are held by oil or coal power companies, why would they work to put themselves out of business?

6. bntihypatoro December 11th, 2007 11:54 pm

   titpywavywise…

   exxicokunyti…

7. bnvatonyhuse December 12th, 2007 3:50 pm

   tithovozatepy…

   exxewyrevuky…

8. bnvivyvesena January 1st, 2008 2:02 pm

   titpoxehuwivi…

   exzorasesero…

Join the discussion:

You must be logged in to post a comment. If you haven't registered yet, click here to register. (It's quick, easy and free. And we won't give your email address to anyone.)