>> I agree with you there, although those anti-nuclear folks have a fair
>> question when they ask what we'll do with the waste.
>We've spent decades messing around with the idea of storing the waste. It is
>well past time we simply hold our noses and fix the problem. IMO, the waste
>needs to be stored in extremely well built holding areas near each reactor.
Not a bad idea. The fact is that now the waste is being stored in relatively
secure areas around the reactors. It seems that the Ds think that by refusing
to solve the waste problem, nukes will go away... well if that happens, there
goes 20% of our electricity... and they don't want coal fired plants. We need
to face the fact that they don't want us to have the energy we need. Same goes
with oil, coal or any currently workable source. When renewables, wind or
solar become available in a practical sense we will use them, but they seem to
think that by depriving us of energy sources they don't approve of, we will
develop sources they do approve of. In their arrogance, they miss the fact
that science doesn't bend to their will. Just witness Algores recent speech.
--
Larry Miller
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/mixed
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
message/rfc822
---
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
