"NotNow" wrote in message
...
Calif Bill wrote:
"NotNow" wrote in message
...
Calif Bill wrote:
"NotNow" wrote in message
...
Keith Nuttle wrote:
NotNow wrote:
Just John II wrote:
On Sun, 09 Aug 2009 14:26:52 -0400, Keith Nuttle
wrote:

J. Leo wrote:
"But a growing number of policy makers say that the world’s
rising
temperatures, surging seas and melting glaciers are a direct
threat to
the national interest.

If the United States does not lead the world in reducing
fossil-fuel
consumption and thus emissions of global warming gases,
proponents of
this view say, a series of global environmental, social,
political and
possibly military crises loom that the nation will urgently have
to
address."

One must wonder why the United States must be the 'leader'. Why
not
Germany, or France, or even Canada? Does the prevention of all
these
global crises depend solely on the leadership of the USA?

And, suppose no one of consequence follows.

Full article at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/09/sc..._r=1&th&emc=th

Oh wait, John Kerry is involved. Now I understand.
--
John H

All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of
binary thinking.
If these people who keep saying there is global warming actually
believed the entire earth was warming, and it was going to create
a global catastrophe, they would be 100% behind nuclear power.
There are no green house gases from a nuclear power plant.

Until I hear they have started building nuclear plants to prevent
global warming I will accept it for what it is, politics.
I agree with this post.
--
John H

All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of
binary thinking.
So if they start building nuclear power plants you'll instantly
believe it's really happening????

http://www.ajc.com/business/southern-102043.html

http://www.altdotenergy.com/2009/01/...t-for-florida/

There are some people who believe the only long term economical
solution for the energy deficiency is nuclear power. Duke Power in
Eastern Carolina has also started the permit process to build several
new additions to existing nuclear plants. However before they can
build they must negotiate the many regulations that were designed to
kill the nuclear industry. (On topic: One of the best fishing and
sailing lakes in the Raleigh area is the 4000 acre Harris lake that
is the part of the cooling system for the Sharon Harris nuclear
plant. )

The THEY I was talking about are obama, pelosi, gore and other who
continual say we have global warming but will not support the nuclear
energy industry. Even the Cap and trade tax bill which is suppose to
be in response to global warming gives no significant support for
nuclear energy.

I didn't know the U.S. government was in the nuclear power plant
building industry. I'm quite liberal in my views, and I'm all for
nuclear power. Funny how I can do that, huh? I don't goose step to any
party.
The Federal Government is in the Non building nuclear power plant
business. The regulations make it so.
They NEED to be regulated.

Yes, but the regulations prevent building. When there are 1-200
different agencies that have to give approval, and then the enviro
lawsuits without merit. These all lead to uneconomical plants.

No they don't. Georgia Power is building one right now! And there are at
least two in Florida being built, and more on the drawing board.


They may have a better license structure in Georgia and Florida. But lots
of the cost of nuke is the permiting process.