On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 07:08:42 -0500, John H. wrote:


Three Mile Island is the typical liberal response. How long ago was
that? How many folks were killed? Do you seriously believe the
technology hasn't improved since then?

The technology has improved considerably, pebble bed reactors, for example, but the bureaucrats that
make decisions haven't improved. The Three Mile Island event happened in 1979, around the same time
that studies of Yucca Mountain were started. Yucca Mountain isn't expected to be in use until @ 2017, at
a cost of somewhere between $50-100 billion. It's capacity is expected to be 70,000 metric tons of
waste. We have already generated @ 60,000 metric tons of nuclear waste. So, basically, Yucca
Mountain will be full before it ever becomes usable, but hey, let's all just jump on the nuclear bandwagon.

Whine all you want about "typical liberal responses", but it was economics that kept nuclear reactors
from being built, economics as in cheap and plentiful coal. Nuclear power is still expensive.

thunder wrote:
On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 07:08:42 -0500, John H. wrote:


Three Mile Island is the typical liberal response. How long ago was
that? How many folks were killed? Do you seriously believe the
technology hasn't improved since then?

The technology has improved considerably, pebble bed reactors, for example, but the bureaucrats that
make decisions haven't improved. The Three Mile Island event happened in 1979, around the same time
that studies of Yucca Mountain were started. Yucca Mountain isn't expected to be in use until @ 2017, at
a cost of somewhere between $50-100 billion. It's capacity is expected to be 70,000 metric tons of
waste. We have already generated @ 60,000 metric tons of nuclear waste. So, basically, Yucca
Mountain will be full before it ever becomes usable, but hey, let's all just jump on the nuclear bandwagon.

Whine all you want about "typical liberal responses", but it was economics that kept nuclear reactors
from being built, economics as in cheap and plentiful coal. Nuclear power is still expensive.




I'm ok with nuclear power plants if there is trustworthy civilian
oversight of the construction and operation, and if the nuclear waste
will be stored only in red states such as Texas, Alabama, and
Mississippi, the places I never willingly visit.

We don't live that far from a nuke plant. I figure when it goes up, I'll
be an even more glowing personality.

On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 08:47:50 -0400, HK wrote:


I'm ok with nuclear power plants if there is trustworthy civilian
oversight of the construction and operation, and if the nuclear waste
will be stored only in red states such as Texas, Alabama, and
Mississippi, the places I never willingly visit.

Hey, I agree. I think nuclear has to play a part in our energy future. I just don't think it is the magical
solution. We are going to spend $50-100 billion to store nuclear waste. Personally, I wonder what the
future would look like if we spent that kind of money on sustainable energy development.

On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 12:42:37 -0000, thunder wrote:

On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 07:08:42 -0500, John H. wrote:


Three Mile Island is the typical liberal response. How long ago was
that? How many folks were killed? Do you seriously believe the
technology hasn't improved since then?

The technology has improved considerably, pebble bed reactors, for example, but the bureaucrats that
make decisions haven't improved. The Three Mile Island event happened in 1979, around the same time
that studies of Yucca Mountain were started. Yucca Mountain isn't expected to be in use until @ 2017, at
a cost of somewhere between $50-100 billion. It's capacity is expected to be 70,000 metric tons of
waste. We have already generated @ 60,000 metric tons of nuclear waste. So, basically, Yucca
Mountain will be full before it ever becomes usable, but hey, let's all just jump on the nuclear bandwagon.

Whine all you want about "typical liberal responses", but it was economics that kept nuclear reactors
from being built, economics as in cheap and plentiful coal. Nuclear power is still expensive.

Do some reading about the recycling technology available today.

thunder wrote:

Whine all you want about "typical liberal responses", but it was economics that kept nuclear reactors
from being built, economics as in cheap and plentiful coal. Nuclear power is still expensive.


Economics and poor management is what killed the WPPSS
projects and economics is why the Trojan plant (Oregon's
only nuke plant)was shut down early.