Should U.S. Put the Brakes on Nuclear Power?
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
19 comments:
NO. We typically overreact on these sort of things and I suspect Uncle Sam will do so again.
Has anyone ever heard of coal? Carbon dioxide a pollutant, I thought that plants and trees need it to survive. All that nonsence about global warming is another way to control the cash.
We should wsork on wind mills...no meltdown there.
Absolutely. No more drilling, no more refineries, no more nuclear power plants. Bet we can get gas to $10/gal by New Years and food to the point where the slim percentage of the population that's working can only afford Chinese rice at $12/lb - everything else will be too expensive.
Shut down those built on fault lines immediately!!!
NO. Build as many as you can along the California Coast
Dont buy any veggies from Cali for the next.....? 100 yrs?
We DID put the brakes on for years, and just recently began to hit the gas pedal again. While the brakes were on, we became more dependent on foreign oil, had more of our economy hijacked by green wackos, and lost standing in the global community. We need to compete. Wind farms are like peeing in the ocean.
No, we should build more. Nuclear power is safe and environmentally friendly.
Of course, they should be built at a place where a chance of seismic activity is low.
Ask this again next week after all the fallout has landed in the US and millions of people are dropping like flies.....
You will not hear anything for the next 20yrs on new nuclearpower plants.
I am amazed that of all the countries, Japan having experienced the horror of radiation exposure, would have a nuclear industry so clearly technically in over its head. They planned for the earthquake, but not the tsunami! No electrically backup for THREE plants that was adequate enough to work! I believe that the public relations line is greatly under stated, and today's headlines are sadly bearing this out. I will say that it causes me to worry that if the Japanese could not do it safely, could we do any better?
YES. Truth be told, the brakes have been on for the past 3 decades. There is no adequate or safe way to dispose of the spent nuke rods(unless you count the A-10 machine gun rounds lol). It's a technology that can't survive itself. Nat Gas is being underutilized. How is it that countries like Iran and Pakistan can have 10x the amount of nat gas vehicles on the road than compared to America? It's a cheap, clean fuel that we can domestically produce. Call for every "branded" station to have atleast one set of NatGas pumps on site within a decade(easy to accomplish, as they are all also involved in the natgas biz). Convert all fleet vehicles over the course of the next decade. It'll open up the market, and it's a decent alternative for the time being.
No...we should go forward. Locate the plants in the safest area possible. Maybe build more but smaller plants.
Put the brakes on? We haven't built one since the 70's!
Now that some of you have made your emotional responses, do some research and make an intelligent response.
Nuclear power isn't the boogey man some of you are trying to make it.
5:21 Bet you don't want one near your home. It is all ok as long as they are somewhere else.
Of course not. Accidents are just that but they are also opportunities to learn from so that they don't happen again.
Should we stop flying? Should we stop driving cars? Should we stop eating food? Should we stop crossing the street? Should we stop electing Democrats in Annapolis. Well... on the last one.....
WTG Al!
We not only should & need more nuke plants, but take this opportunity to learn about containment in a worse case scenario should one occur.
Post a Comment