Reply #82: I have no patience with the lies and secrecy on both sides of this issue. [View All]

[hunter]

I "retired" as a hardcore anti-nuclear activist almost twenty years ago, after I decided both sides were full of shit.

I've recently adopted the Theodore Sturgeon attitude that 90% of everything is shit, and this allows me, once again, to decide if I am pro-nuclear or anti-nuclear.

One thing I do know -- so long as the corrupt rat-bastards in the Bush Administration control things, I will be anti-nuclear. I wouldn't trust these ignorant clowns to serve breakfast at McDonalds, much less regulate a renewed nuclear power industry.

At the same time I believe nuclear power is one of the few hopes we have of maintaining our high technology "life style." Eventually humans will switch over to a high technology society based on biology (or we will die) but until then nuclear power is not an unreasonable option.

I posted this on the solar tower thread, but here's the google "satellite" picture of the Palo Verde generating station in Arizona:

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Phoenix+Arizona&ll=33.387215,-112.865617&spn=0.051670,0.056562&t=k&hl=en

These are three 1270 MWe reactors.

You tell me how you might replace the electricity they produce, and then we can talk.

"Conservation" is a fine option, but I would rather shut down the coal fired plants first. (FYI, every light in our house is a compact fluorescent, and we don't use an air conditioner.)

My wife and I have a total weekly commute of about ten miles. We have two cars, but if things ever get really ugly and we can't buy gasoline, we don't need them.

So, what next?