I didn't present half the story- thier proposal was thier 20th or 30th unacceptable proposal, as usual- a fake one really- it is something we are used too.

Bottom line is- they are sitting on it, while complaining about not being able to open another field. I see no reason to open another field until they have proven they can open the ones they already have and refuse to open.

It isn't as simple as asserting that politicians are slowing the process, unfortunately. But, you're probably right that the process could be sped up by 5 years or so.


So, you're proposing that these nuke plants will be run by the government? Or are you proposing that we sell/lease land to private industry to build nuke plants?


Thanks for the link showing a real world deployment of superconducting power lines. That's pretty cool. However, the Congress isn't the institution slowing things down here; it's the DOE. I suppose, though, that any excuse for you to rail against the Democrats is an excuse you don't pass up. So, rail away...

What is unacceptable about their proposals? Then the fault is a corrupt Alaska – they should have taken back the lease years ago. What is the excuse for not doing this??? Payoffs???



Lease or sell who cares. There is plenty of land available once the transmission issue is dealt with – and superconducting wire can do that. We need a crash program to build nuke plants as fast as we can. Even the sponsors of the recent “carbon tax” bill (debacle) said without nukes the plan was dead meat.



Just a hint DOE is part of the Federal system. And its not just the Dems – the Republicans did squat and Clinton the same – the bottom line is the current Administration has the ball and we all need to pound them with mail until they get off their fuzzy buts and DO SOMETHING.

Obama can talk “change” all day – I see none for decades. And he is in the pocket of the “greens” and they have stopped nukes and anything that could hurt a bird etc. – for decades.

Tell me how change is possible. Tell me please……………………..

Nuke plants must be near a fresh water source so it isn't like all land is equal. Nuke plants require a decent transportation infrastructure so it isn't like you can pick some random remote area and expect success. Nevertheless, I agree that aggressive policy towards building more nuke plants would be a good thing™. BTW, the point about selling or leasing public land is that the public gets to have a say in its use.


The DOE, while federal, is not controlled by the Congress: it is controlled by the Executive branch. The DOE is the institution that created the roadblocks against building more nuke plants. Reform the DOE and then we'll be able to get somewhere.


Woah there, partner. The sky isn't falling. A number of "greens" are in favor of nuke plants. But, you are focusing so much on energy generation that you're ignoring things we can do *right* now; things that don't take decades to build. Let's talk about that.

Such as change jobs to reduce commute – thermostats to 65 deg? Sell big cars and get Honda Fit?

Not easily done and not cheap. The average guy with 2 kids and a five year old car is not going to be doing any of this “right now’.

And the “greens “ are by far the most vocal on stopping nukes and I include Sierra Club and various other “environmental orgs in that category.

http://ecostreet.com/blog/renewable-energy...-nuclear-power/

http://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/help/help_stop_nukes.php

I would settle for lots of wind power but the area required and chance of getting them approved is low even compared to nukes. I am pessimistic – and the Obama people spout nothing but rhetoric – tell me exactly how and when is what we need to hear – and I hear nothing much.

I prefer the McCain position.

https://www.johnmccain.com/informing/news/S...297872571ed.htm

Did you read anything I posted earlier on this subject?

Efficiency
1. Higher efficiency appliances, heating, cooling & lighting
2. Better insulation
3. Higher efficiency automobiles
4. Public transit like buses

People can do this stuff now. And there are many, many more ideas. Building a nuke plant takes 15 years. Buying a high efficiency appliance takes a couple of hours. Anyway, you and I don't disagree that more energy generation capacity is needed; you just seem singularly focused on it.


Some organizations with a green agenda don't want nuke plants; therefore, *all* organizations with a green agenda don't want nuke plants. Any other illogical generalizations you wish to employ?

Conservation makes good sense- no doubt about it. Funny- Ted rails on about "rhetoric" and "lip service" and then posts McCain's website as a "good energy policy"- really, nothing different than we are doing now, with the same roadblocks.

Bottom line is- we are going to probably have the free market wean us off big oil, and soon- we simply can't afford the stuff anymore.

Bio-fuels like McCain talked about is no more realistic of a problem solver than waiting for the flux-capacitor to be invented. They use up too much arable land at this point.

We simply need folks to start using less fuel, period. And the free market will take care of that soon anyway.

When Al Gore, way back in the day, suggested a tax on gas to make it go to 5 bucks a gallon, and use the proceeds to start weaning us off fuel then, he was ridiculed badly. Now, turns out, Big Al was right again- had we simply bit the bullet earlier, and started pumping funding into alternative energies back then, and started to force-wean us when we still had the wherewithal to pay for it- we would be golden today, most likely.

Nuke plants as it stands right now aren't all that great- look at how many have been shut down due to sloppy management or just plain for being lemons.

I like Nuke power- seems like a good idea, except for some very nagging issues- what to do with the waste, how to make them more efficient and less prone to being "lemons".

Did you read anything I posted earlier on this subject?
I have commented before on this. And people can really do little. The car companies are building cars as mandated and people buy them. Lets see if the Dems speed up the increase in the CAFÉ. I doubt they will

All new appliances are higher efficiency – and people are buying them

The biggest disaster – and I have mentioned it is there has been no increase in the insulation required for new houses in decades. So the buyer buys a house and all he can do is put in better windows.

Public transit use is way up – even on our abysmal no/low security systems.



Most do. I heard an amusing story the other day about the Yucca mountain nuclear waste facility approval – in the works for 20 YEARS. The 5,000 page government application (with MILLIONS of pages of backup) has finally been sent in to the NRC. They have 3 years to look it over and then open it for review, law suites etc.

We are DOOMED with a government that takes this amount of time to get things done. DOOMED.

CR
Conservation makes good sense- no doubt about it. Funny- Ted rails on about "rhetoric" and "lip service" and then posts McCain's website as a "good energy policy"- really, nothing different than we are doing now, with the same roadblocks.

McCain gets things done – even if he has to cross the isle to do it. If it can be done I trust McCain to do it and he will not allow big stupid bureaucracies to hold progress up indefinitely .