Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
The only thing about Nuclear is that I feel like we're going backwards instead of forwards.
They give terrorists another target, and create a pretty bad waste situation, on where no one, even the place in Nevada we're designing, want to take the waste.
I like the idea of not buying oil from the people who are terrorists, lowing the price of oil generally by not using nearly as much of it, for those of us who'll still be using it in the future. That will be, of course, most of us, since plastics, cosmetics, shingles, and all sorts of other petroleum based products will always be with us in some form.
The really great thing about solar, other than the clean aspect, is that it decentralizes the production of electricity. In the South in particular, they work best when they are needed the most, on really hot, sunny days, they are producing like crazy, just when all of our air conditioners are turned up full blast. If there is one my heat rash and I do not want to give up is AC.
Windmills and solar farms in the desert have small downsides, and though I certainly care about nature, my BS detector tells me that, sure a few birds will be knocked down, and maybe some desert dwellers will have some very localized problems, but in general, it sounds like a great thing to put in a desert, a huge plant, producing power.
Plus there's that unofficial unemployment rate of 19 percent. Build those grids, build many solar plants, and inverter plants, and get the price down where I don't have to pay almost as much as my little house is worth to put them on my southern-facing roof surfaces.
The only thing about Nuclear is that I feel like we're going backwards instead of forwards.
They give terrorists another target, and create a pretty bad waste situation, on where no one, even the place in Nevada we're designing, want to take the waste.
I like the idea of not buying oil from the people who are terrorists, lowing the price of oil generally by not using nearly as much of it, for those of us who'll still be using it in the future. That will be, of course, most of us, since plastics, cosmetics, shingles, and all sorts of other petroleum based products will always be with us in some form.
The really great thing about solar, other than the clean aspect, is that it decentralizes the production of electricity. In the South in particular, they work best when they are needed the most, on really hot, sunny days, they are producing like crazy, just when all of our air conditioners are turned up full blast. If there is one my heat rash and I do not want to give up is AC.
Windmills and solar farms in the desert have small downsides, and though I certainly care about nature, my BS detector tells me that, sure a few birds will be knocked down, and maybe some desert dwellers will have some very localized problems, but in general, it sounds like a great thing to put in a desert, a huge plant, producing power.
Plus there's that unofficial unemployment rate of 19 percent. Build those grids, build many solar plants, and inverter plants, and get the price down where I don't have to pay almost as much as my little house is worth to put them on my southern-facing roof surfaces.
Money is not the problem. Red tape is.The problem is Mid that I don't think a private co could get the kind of money they need to build one. That and the fact that the FED could get past most of the red tape if they were serious about nuclear power.
Why would you see it as a bad thing if the FED builds them and then leases them to power cos?
The bolded part of your post above is your problem. You are "feeling" instead of thinking.The only thing about Nuclear is that I feel like we're going backwards instead of forwards.
They give terrorists another target, and create a pretty bad waste situation, on where no one, even the place in Nevada we're designing, want to take the waste.
I like the idea of not buying oil from the people who are terrorists, lowing the price of oil generally by not using nearly as much of it, for those of us who'll still be using it in the future. That will be, of course, most of us, since plastics, cosmetics, shingles, and all sorts of other petroleum based products will always be with us in some form.
The really great thing about solar, other than the clean aspect, is that it decentralizes the production of electricity. In the South in particular, they work best when they are needed the most, on really hot, sunny days, they are producing like crazy, just when all of our air conditioners are turned up full blast. If there is one my heat rash and I do not want to give up is AC.
Windmills and solar farms in the desert have small downsides, and though I certainly care about nature, my BS detector tells me that, sure a few birds will be knocked down, and maybe some desert dwellers will have some very localized problems, but in general, it sounds like a great thing to put in a desert, a huge plant, producing power.
Plus there's that unofficial unemployment rate of 19 percent. Build those grids, build many solar plants, and inverter plants, and get the price down where I don't have to pay almost as much as my little house is worth to put them on my southern-facing roof surfaces.
I would like to have an honest, fair, and POLITE debate about energy policy including plug in electric cars and other alt energy cars. I would also like to discuss new ways of producing energy and the idea of new nuclear power plants to supply our energy until such a time as we can get ALL our power from solar sources.
ONCE AGAIN I WOULD LIKE TO KEEP THIS THREAD FRIENDLY!
Well o.k. OZZ a bit of an extremist yourself then hmmm? But let's try to come up with some solutions here. I think that when the electric car becomes cheaper that eveyone should at least CONSIDER replacing one of their households cars with a plug in. I also beleive that we need 10-20 nuke plants by 2020 and I think the only way to do that is for the FED to build them.
Only CAPITALISM can fix the problem the FED needs to get the HELL OUT OF THE WAY...............DRILL, DRILL, DRILL
WHY do people think that? It's nonsensical! NO cars have EVER become cheaper! EVER! No matter how many are made!Well o.k. OZZ a bit of an extremist yourself then hmmm? But let's try to come up with some solutions here. I think that when the electric car becomes cheaper that eveyone should at least CONSIDER replacing one of their households cars with a plug in. I also beleive that we need 10-20 nuke plants by 2020 and I think the only way to do that is for the FED to build them.
Well o.k. OZZ a bit of an extremist yourself then hmmm? But let's try to come up with some solutions here. I think that when the electric car becomes cheaper that eveyone should at least CONSIDER replacing one of their households cars with a plug in. I also beleive that we need 10-20 nuke plants by 2020 and I think the only way to do that is for the FED to build them.
You mean like the fed build social security
Well o.k. OZZ a bit of an extremist yourself then hmmm? But let's try to come up with some solutions here. I think that when the electric car becomes cheaper that eveyone should at least CONSIDER replacing one of their households cars with a plug in. I also beleive that we need 10-20 nuke plants by 2020 and I think the only way to do that is for the FED to build them.
You mean like the fed build social security
Fucking stupid, Ozz. We have less than 3% of the known reserves in the world, and use 25% of the petroleum. And don't even start the idiocy about the oil shales. Technologically unfeasable, and economically impossible.
hell. TMI wasnt the disaster the enviroweenies claimedI just wish that the extreme enviros would recognize that new nuke plants are NOTHING like Three Mile Island.
Nuclear has a bad name in this nation because of the people that sold it. They sold it to us as so cheap we wouldn't have to meter it. And that it was completely safe. Well, it turned out to be damned expensive. And Three Mile Island was a damned close thing. It is not liberals that killed nuclear, it was nuclear advocates that made wild claims.
Nuclear has a very definate place in our energy future, as does wind, solar, geothermal, and other methods. Cost and availability will determine much of what is used where. Right now, wind is one of the cheapest, on overall costs, as is geothermal. Solar, by what a little Oregon company has developed, may soon be the cheapest of all. There is a hugh area in the US that is just begging for solar. They are called roofs. And every industrial and commericial complex has acres of them. Not only that, on residential, it would solve the problem of where the power for our electric vehicles is to come from.
There is no singe 'best' method. The availability of local sources will determine what is best where.
^^^^nuclear has a bad name in this nation because of the people that sold it. They sold it to us as so cheap we wouldn't have to meter it. And that it was completely safe. Well, it turned out to be damned expensive. And three mile island was a damned close thing. It is not liberals that killed nuclear, it was nuclear advocates that made wild claims.
Nuclear has a very definate place in our energy future, as does wind, solar, geothermal, and other methods. Cost and availability will determine much of what is used where. Right now, wind is one of the cheapest, on overall costs, as is geothermal. Solar, by what a little oregon company has developed, may soon be the cheapest of all. There is a hugh area in the us that is just begging for solar. They are called roofs. And every industrial and commericial complex has acres of them. Not only that, on residential, it would solve the problem of where the power for our electric vehicles is to come from.
There is no singe 'best' method. The availability of local sources will determine what is best where.
Nuclear has a bad name in this nation because of the people that sold it. They sold it to us as so cheap we wouldn't have to meter it. And that it was completely safe. Well, it turned out to be damned expensive. And Three Mile Island was a damned close thing. It is not liberals that killed nuclear, it was nuclear advocates that made wild claims.
Nuclear has a very definate place in our energy future, as does wind, solar, geothermal, and other methods. Cost and availability will determine much of what is used where. Right now, wind is one of the cheapest, on overall costs, as is geothermal. Solar, by what a little Oregon company has developed, may soon be the cheapest of all. There is a hugh area in the US that is just begging for solar. They are called roofs. And every industrial and commericial complex has acres of them. Not only that, on residential, it would solve the problem of where the power for our electric vehicles is to come from.
There is no singe 'best' method. The availability of local sources will determine what is best where.
You mean like the fed build social security
Fucking stupid, Ozz. We have less than 3% of the known reserves in the world, and use 25% of the petroleum. And don't even start the idiocy about the oil shales. Technologically unfeasable, and economically impossible.
No, we supply less than 3% ... there is more oil below us, just no one lets us drill for it.
