On Sat, 03 Oct 2009 15:14:56 -0400, JohnH wrote:


Gosh, if we went nuclear, like France, wouldn't that be much cleaner?
Don't you ever wonder what the liberal aversion to nuclear energy is all
about? Could it simply be an aversion to problem solving?

Liberal aversion? Yeah, right. Only if all businessmen are liberal.
France went nuclear because it doesn't have oil or coal reserves. We do,
and they are still cheaper than nuclear power. Of course, we could go
totally nuclear, but you explain to the American public the reason for
the surge in their utility bills.

On Sat, 03 Oct 2009 15:20:22 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Sat, 03 Oct 2009 15:14:56 -0400, JohnH wrote:


Gosh, if we went nuclear, like France, wouldn't that be much cleaner?
Don't you ever wonder what the liberal aversion to nuclear energy is all
about? Could it simply be an aversion to problem solving?

Liberal aversion? Yeah, right. Only if all businessmen are liberal.
France went nuclear because it doesn't have oil or coal reserves. We do,
and they are still cheaper than nuclear power. Of course, we could go
totally nuclear, but you explain to the American public the reason for
the surge in their utility bills.

Cap and trade won't affect utility bills?
--
John H

All decisions, even those of liberals, are the result of binary thinking.

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 03 Oct 2009 15:14:56 -0400, JohnH wrote:


Gosh, if we went nuclear, like France, wouldn't that be much cleaner?
Don't you ever wonder what the liberal aversion to nuclear energy is all
about? Could it simply be an aversion to problem solving?

Liberal aversion? Yeah, right. Only if all businessmen are liberal.
France went nuclear because it doesn't have oil or coal reserves. We do,
and they are still cheaper than nuclear power. Of course, we could go
totally nuclear, but you explain to the American public the reason for
the surge in their utility bills.

It would have reduced or even eliminated our "dependence on foreign
oil." Isn't that a strategic goal of the USA.

The increase in electricty costs would have had a real and specific
reasons rather than redistribution of income via "Cap and Trade."

On Sun, 4 Oct 2009 09:30:41 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 03 Oct 2009 15:14:56 -0400, JohnH wrote:


Gosh, if we went nuclear, like France, wouldn't that be much cleaner?
Don't you ever wonder what the liberal aversion to nuclear energy is all
about? Could it simply be an aversion to problem solving?

Liberal aversion? Yeah, right. Only if all businessmen are liberal.
France went nuclear because it doesn't have oil or coal reserves. We do,
and they are still cheaper than nuclear power. Of course, we could go
totally nuclear, but you explain to the American public the reason for
the surge in their utility bills.

It would have reduced or even eliminated our "dependence on foreign
oil." Isn't that a strategic goal of the USA.

The increase in electricty costs would have had a real and specific
reasons rather than redistribution of income via "Cap and Trade."


I think I mentioned that just before he called me an 'asshole'.
--
John H

All decisions, even those of liberals, are the result of binary thinking.

On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 09:30:41 -0400, BAR wrote:


Liberal aversion? Yeah, right. Only if all businessmen are liberal.
France went nuclear because it doesn't have oil or coal reserves. We
do, and they are still cheaper than nuclear power. Of course, we could
go totally nuclear, but you explain to the American public the reason
for the surge in their utility bills.

It would have reduced or even eliminated our "dependence on foreign
oil." Isn't that a strategic goal of the USA.

Depends on which President, doesn't it? I remember Carter's initiative
to be energy independent by the year 2000. It was dismantled by Reagan,
who believed market forces would take care of us. While I believe the
money flight because of foreign oil dependence hasn't helped us, since
Reagan, nothing much has been done towards energy independence.

It's clear nuclear power will have to be part of our energy future, but I
don't think it's a silver bullet. Lifestyle changes, conservation,
solar, wind, etc., will also play a part.

The increase in electricty costs would have had a real and specific
reasons rather than redistribution of income via "Cap and Trade."