Slashdot Mirror


McCain Backs Nuclear Power

bagsc writes "Senator John McCain set out another branch of his energy policy agenda today, with a key point: 45 new nuclear power plants by 2030." So it finally appears that this discussion is back on the table. I'm curious how Nevada feels about this, as well as the Obama campaign. All it took was $4/gallon gas I guess. When it hits $5, I figure one of the campaigns will start to promote Perpetual Motion.

12 of 1,563 comments (clear)

  1. Bigfoot Smallfoot by DustyCase · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Nuke looks nice at the point of generation, but it looks less nice when you look at the emissions and environmental impact of mining uranium and processing it into fuel rods. And then there is that nasty disposal problem. And then you have siting and permit issues. And the cost of construction.

    OK, Here's my offer: Just pay no attention to the fine print and McSame has a good point!

    STOP!!! DON'T READ THAT!!! THE FINE PRINT IS NOT PART OF THE DISCUSSION!!!

    1. Re:Bigfoot Smallfoot by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You should check out my post on how to safely dispose of spent nuclear fuel.

      But, then I actually know about nuclear technology and don't get all my information from biased, anti-nuclear environmentalists.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
  2. Nuclear power is not the solution by Renderer+of+Evil · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    I have a more elegant solution that all sides can agree on. We round up all the Republicans, wire them into an AI system like the Matrix and derive our energy from them to power our homes. In return they can continue to live in their fantasy land and enact whatever laws they want - prayer in schools, privatization of everything, and a constitution where the second amendment is bolded and underlined. Hell, we'll even resurrect Reagan and code him in as the permanent president.

  3. Didn't expect much by Moryath · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Any time you tell the truth about "Saint Carter" or "The Blessed Barack", you get slashdot trolls attacking you left and right.

  4. YOU do some research, fucking moron by Moryath · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Hey jackass, where are you going to store all the nuclear waster? In your backyard? Let's sing you up. Do some research.

    Better idea: put a breeder reactor RIGHT in my backyard. Reprocess the spent "waste" right back into fuel for reuse, like RESPONSIBLE people would (and DO) do in other countries.

    The reason we don't have breeder reactors in America? Jimmy Carter thought the US could serve an "example" to tin-pot dictators like Syria, Pakistan, India, North Korea, Iran, China, etc... by having a "moratorium" on nuclear enrichment. Gee, how'd that work out so far?

  5. Yep, there come the Obamabots by Moryath · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    "drool drool gotta mod down anyone who talks the truth about St. Barack drool drool droll"

  6. Re:Seriously, WTF? by cliffski · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    as a concerned, and interested environmentalist, this:

    "hysteria-spreading, anti-nuclear, tree-huggers"

    just makes me stop reading. Great way to win over public opinion, talk down to and insult everyone who has understandable concerns about nuclear power. like it or not, chernobyl and 3 mile island happened. Like it or not, nuclear power stations are manned by people and subject to accidents and incompetence (and cost cutting). Insulting anyone who dares to air legitimate concerns is the best way to ensure they are never inclined to listen to your POV.

    --
    DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
  7. Re:Seriously, WTF? by cliffski · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    now you are telling me I'm not technologically savvy. I'm a computer programmer. My wife is a geneticist. I am not a luddite. I am not spreading FUD, but yet the slashdot crowd will insult and talk down to me for daring to be concerned about the environment.

    This is why people like me never listen to arguments in favour of nuclear power, because they always come served with a generous side salad of sarcasm, abuse and condescension.

    --
    DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
  8. Re:Seriously, WTF? by Moryath · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    It's not necessarily the "funding" - it's getting past the NIMBY factor and all the hippy enviro-nutjobs who show up WHEREVER you try to build one causing trouble, trying to get your permits reconsidered/denied, making ludicrous false claims to force you to redo your impact studies a thousand times, and yes, even engaging in actual vandalism and destruction of property.

    "Further, I suspect that by the time all the dust settles on bringing the next nuclear power plant online (10+ years is my off-the-cuff guess), that the cost for solar power will have dropped by an order of magnitude or two."

    Howzat? The cost of raw materials for polysilicate is not going to go down, if anything it will go up. The cost of metal and the polishing sludge (which BTW is highly toxic and pretty much toxifies the soil forever even after the solar farm is removed from the area) for solar farms? Don't make me laugh.

    My thought is to take all the nuclear public subsidy money and plug it into purchase contracts to install solar power on gov't facilities.

    And if you had more than two brain cells to rub together, you'd realize why this is a fucking stupid idea. See above. No seriously, look up, see the cloud, and realize how EASY it is to get into a power deficit if you rely solely on solar.

  9. Actually Carter was a worse dumbfuck than that by Moryath · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    The other half of his argument was that "if we don't reprocess nuclear materials, it'll be an example to other nations and they won't either."

    And as a result, the following nations lack either Nuclear Weapons or Nuclear Weapon Programs today: North Korea, Pakistan, India, Syria, Iran, China... oh, right.

    Carter is, and has always been, a moron.

  10. Re:Seriously, WTF? by smoker2 · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Exactly. Chernobyl is already getting to habitable levels again, plants are growing, tours are being given, it's still far from safe enough to live in constantly, but it's getting closer. Yeah, fuck the thousands who've died or been crippled by that incident. We can afford to lose that many if the rest of us get cheaper power.</sarcasm>
  11. Re:Seriously, WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    s/people/chinks/