And Now For Our Science Lesson Of The Day

[Dr.Traveler]

Now nuclear, and why it is not more widespread, is another issue.

Nuclear would be more used if we could keep the reactors safe.
That won't happen until the "captains of Industry" are held to the same level of accountability as the captains of US Navy ships. Cutting corners for immediate profits eventually causes problems, those problems are the reason no one wants a fission reactor in their area. Though anyone who smokes and complains about the cancer risk is a hypocrite.

That seems to pretty much sum things up from what I understand. Everyone likes nuclear power, no one wants it in their back yard.

I would like to learn more about the nuclear power issue. Why is it that countries like France can build multiple nuclear power plants, but a country like ours with even greater energy needs can't seem to get it together to build more than a handful?

 

[mightypeon]

Largely political reasons.
Concerning Nuclear Energy: Yes Nuclear Energy has risks, however, Geothermal stuff would very likely to have risks too. I cannot imagine that drilling into the earth core is risk free.
The reasons why there isnt more nuclear power? Political.

 

[IanC]

Gore said you could use the heat to make steam which would spin turbans! I thought it only took a few cartoons of Mohammed to make turbans spin.

(I realize he just mispronounced tur-bine)

 

[mightypeon]

I imagine that a lot of Turbans would spin if they can no longer sell oil

 

[CrusaderFrank]

millions of degrees lololol, remember how the Libs said Dan Quayle was stewpit?

 

[asaratis]

Wow, you're so smart.

I have questions.

For which scientific field was Gore awarded the Nobel Prize?

Exactly how old was the earth when God "shimmered" people into being from dirt?

Gore was awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace. Same prize Obama got. Both received it for doing nothing at all related peace or anything else for that matter.

Demonstrated ability to open Cracker Jacks and find prize?

Best guess estimate on the shimmering time was sometime before the advent of the divergance of the lines that led to the human and Chimp development. Probably about the same number of years as the number of angels that can dance on a the head of pin. Probably as relevant to anything as that, also.

LOL. Torques you jaws that Gore is a success in business, and a success as a lecturer on the dangers in the ongoing AGW.

Yes, Gore has been a very successful businessman. Made a bundle of money in the hi-tech market when that market was on a downer.

Took a lecture on an unpopular subject, and became an international celebrity giving that lecture.

Then made it into a movie and won multiple awards. And won the Nobel for presenting the information worldwide, and raising awareness of the problems that are developing right now.

And proved he is a better capitalist than all of his detractors.

Yeah...just think how much he's gonna rake in at the Global Warming Convention when he addresses the masses at a 1200 dollar a seat....ooooops...I forget! He chickened out!!!!!

I hear there's thought of retrieving his Oscar also. Seems his movie is no longer a documentary. But that's okay. Neither are Micheal Moore's films truthful. Liberalism is a mental disorder easily diagnosed by the observation of continuous dishonesty and redefinition of appropriate behavior in excuse for having been caught lying again.

Gore is toast! You read it right here, folks! Albert Bonzo Gore is TOAST!!

Go ahead. The rest of the world is not.

Speaking for 6.3 billion people, are we now?

The audiences that Al Gore draws world wide speak for him, and the worldwide opinion of him.

Yeah...just think how much he's gonna rake in at the Global Warming Convention when he addresses the masses at a 1200 dollar a seat....ooooops...I forget! He chickened out!!!!!

....oooops!...I just said that!

Now nuclear, and why it is not more widespread, is another issue.

Nuclear would be more used if we could keep the reactors safe.
That won't happen until the "captains of Industry" are held to the same level of accountability as the captains of US Navy ships. Cutting corners for immediate profits eventually causes problems, those problems are the reason no one wants a fission reactor in their area. Though anyone who smokes and complains about the cancer risk is a hypocrite.

Now nuclear, and why it is not more widespread, is another issue.

Nuclear would be more used if we could keep the reactors safe.
That won't happen until the "captains of Industry" are held to the same level of accountability as the captains of US Navy ships. Cutting corners for immediate profits eventually causes problems, those problems are the reason no one wants a fission reactor in their area. Though anyone who smokes and complains about the cancer risk is a hypocrite.

That seems to pretty much sum things up from what I understand. Everyone likes nuclear power, no one wants it in their back yard.

I would like to learn more about the nuclear power issue. Why is it that countries like France can build multiple nuclear power plants, but a country like ours with even greater energy needs can't seem to get it together to build more than a handful?

We have 62 nuclear plants...according to Nuclear Plants Operating in the United States, 2003

...somehow the number 106 comes to mind. Could it be that when a plant is down for maintenance it is not listed as an operating plant? Do we have 106 plants or not?

France succeeds because they designed a working plant and copied it in multiple locations. We insist on starting from scratch at every site. The French have more time to address safety issues.