REPUBLICAN MAJORITY IN CONGRESS ARE PUSHING NUCLEAR ENERGY, WITHOUT ANY REGARDS FOR SAFETY STANDARDS
Abel
source of power, it was our main source of energy, just feeding
ourselves, and our animals and livestock, e.t.c. For example, if you
want to know many calories you burn up, from eating one apple, you
burn that apple to ashes, and you get your answer. Food is burned up
in our bodies, that's what gives humans the energy they need to
function. This is what has kept us going, for most of the world's
history. But now, we have advanced to the stage where we are feeding
more than just ourselves, now we consume far larger amounts of energy,
by burning coal, oil and nuclear power, in order to feed our homes,
our businesses and our government structures.
In just the past year, three of the world’s main sources of energy:
COAL, OIL & NUCLEAR POWER...they have all proven themselves to have
the ability to wreak catastrophic accidents, such as the Upper Big
Branch coal mine explosion in West Virginia, and the Deepwater Horizon
blowout/oil-spill in the Gulf of Mexico and the recently unfolding
nuclear crisis in Japan.
Last year, after the catastrophic oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico,
Republicans voiced strong objections to the fact that Obama imposed a
temporary moratorium on deepwater drilling until more stringent safety
and environmental rules would be written.
In the wake of Japan's nuclear crisis, Senate Republican leader Mitch
McConnell recently warned Obama not to overreact by clamping down on
the domestic nuclear industry. “I don’t think right after a major
environmental catastrophe is a good time to be making American
domestic policy,” Mr. McConnell said on “Fox News Sunday.”
After the Three Mile Island nuclear meltdown of 1979, a "not in my
backyard" movement started to gain steam, with the result being that
local governments rejected dozens of permits for the constructions of
nuclear power plants. Traditionally, Democrats have been less willing
to accept the risk associated with nuclear energy, until recently that
is, when Obama reached out for a bipartisan consensus to give support
to the idea of building more nuclear power plants, and to drill for
more oil and to burn more "clean coal". But Obama's support for coal
and oil were set back by last year’s spectacular mining and drilling
disasters, and now Obama's plans to increase our reliance on nuclear
energy will also very likely be set back by the Japan nuclear
crisis.
Clearly, as our appetite for energy increases, the solution is for our
government to implement more stringent safety standards (aka
"government regulations), and just plain impose them on all of the
energy industries in question...which may not be easy, since we happen
to have a political system that FAVORS all the big energy industries
that do not want to abide by ANY safety standards at all.
Democratic Congressman Edward J. Markey (of Massachusetts) said that
in the wake of the recent nuclear catastrophes in Japan, Congress
should impose tougher standards for all of our sitting and operating
nuclear power plants, and he said that government regulators should
consider a moratorium on locating nuclear plants in seismically active
areas, require stronger containment vessels in earthquake-prone
regions and to thoroughly review the American nuclear power industry.
Recent events in Japan have awoken our government officials to the
need for setting more stringent safety standards on the nuclear
industry, but unfortunately, Democrats are a minority in Congress, and
can not get anything done on this major issue without the support of a
Republican majority. Republicans on the other hand, are only
expressing verbal support for nuclear safety, but in reality they are
going all out in pushing for the construction of 100 new nuclear
reactors, as fast as possible, which means that safety regulations (if
they exist) will be completely bypassed.
On Capitol Hill, the Republican Congressman Fred Upton, Chairman of
the Energy and Commerce Committee, has expressed unhappiness at the
pace that permits are issued.
"We want to find out why it takes so long to go from start to finish
on a new nuclear reactor," Upton said last Thursday. "Why does it take
us 10 to 12 years and it takes the French and Japanese four to five
years? We want to see what we can do to change that. By lowering the
number years, we can lower the cost."
Abel Malcolm
http://www.ehow.com/about_4759852_dangers-nuclear-power-plants.html
http://www.physics.isu.edu/radinf/np-risk.htm
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/51182.html#ixzz1GX3gpDgk
Lil Abner
> Mankind has advanced quite a bit from the days when food was our main
> source of power, it was our main source of energy, just feeding
> ourselves, and our animals and livestock, e.t.c. For example, if you
> want to know many calories you burn up, from eating one apple, you
> burn that apple to ashes, and you get your answer. Food is burned up
> in our bodies, that's what gives humans the energy they need to
> function. This is what has kept us going, for most of the world's
> history. But now, we have advanced to the stage where we are feeding
> more than just ourselves, now we consume far larger amounts of energy,
> by burning coal, oil and nuclear power, in order to feed our homes,
> our businesses and our government structures.
>
> In just the past year, three of the world’s main sources of energy:
blue and their is no risk. You have to learn to minimize the risk but
you will never get rid of it.
this bs about wind and photovoletic cost more than they produce from
initial huge cost and maintenance and limited outputs.
You have to use coal, petroleum, natural gas or nuclear.
We have to learn to manage Nuclear safely either that or this crowd
better start growing fur and find their cave and field to graze.
It's a bout time for this crowd to grow up.
Neolibertarian
<3b2c342b-9b11-471f...@r17g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
Abel <abelm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Mankind has advanced quite a bit from the days when food was our main
> source of power,
Yeah, just look around at Usenet.
--
Neolibertarian
"[The American People] know that we don't have deficits
because people are taxed too little; we have deficits
because big government spends too much."
---Ronald Reagan