What if Bush actually saved us?

[The T]

His mommy left him home alone again and left the cabinet where the coloring books are kept unlocked.

The liquor cabinet, too.

And ganja stash.

 

[Mustang]

I think someone has been watching reruns of Fantasy Island.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Nuclear is the way to go. It's constant, steady and doesn't need vast amounts of land.

Fine!!

Let's bury all the WASTE at the Crawford Hog Farm!!!!!!!!!

​

Wind won't replace fossil fuels. Solar won't replace fossil fuels. There is no Magic Energy that's non-polluting, domestically-produced, and cheap.

Oh, and cheesy Photoshop. Remind me again...why is it you think you hold the moral high ground?

oooooooooooooooooooooooo.....yeah.....we wouldn't want to ask too-many questions about the obvious....THE WASTE!!!!!!

"The time frame in question when dealing with radioactive waste ranges from 10,000 to 1,000,000 years, according to studies based on the effect of estimated radiation doses. Researchers suggest that forecasts of health detriment for such periods should be examined critically. Practical studies only consider up to 100 years as far as effective planning and cost evaluations are concerned. Long term behavior of radioactive wastes remains a subject for ongoing research projects."

HERE​

 

[NYcarbineer]

It never stops to surprise me how many people think we went there for cheap oil.

Iraq invaded Kuwait for oil, b/c they produced so little.

Invading Iraq did nothing for our oil supply.

Cutting off oil drilling is keeping us from cheap oil, and a bullshit attempt to force green energy.

Maybe if you knew a LITTLE history you wouldn't be so confused.

Justification for attacking Iraq 1990/91?

George Bush Sr., to a joint session of Congress September 1990:

Vital economic interests are at risk as well. Iraq itself controls some 10 percent of the world's proven oil reserves. Iraq plus Kuwait controls twice that. An Iraq permitted to swallow Kuwait would have the economic and military power, as well as the arrogance, to intimidate and coerce its neighbors -- neighbors who control the lion's share of the world's remaining oil reserves.

George Bush Speech

 

[daveman]

oooooooooooooooooooooooo.....yeah.....we wouldn't want to ask too-many questions about the obvious....THE WASTE!!!!!!

"The time frame in question when dealing with radioactive waste ranges from 10,000 to 1,000,000 years, according to studies based on the effect of estimated radiation doses. Researchers suggest that forecasts of health detriment for such periods should be examined critically. Practical studies only consider up to 100 years as far as effective planning and cost evaluations are concerned. Long term behavior of radioactive wastes remains a subject for ongoing research projects."

Your pain-in-the-ass formatting is exceeded only by your ignorance.

Spent nuclear fuel can be reprocessed.

Meanwhile, you Magic Energy morons still haven't come up with any workable alternatives to coal and nuclear.

 

[Uncensored2008]

oooooooooooooooooooooooo.....yeah.....we wouldn't want to ask too-many questions about the obvious....THE WASTE!!!!!!
​

So just how many fuel rods do you think a medium sized breeder reactor goes through in a month?

Less than a million?

​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

What if Bush actually saved us?

Hell, if Bush cured cancer, there'd be people who'b bitch that he didn't do anything about gum disease.

Yeah.....he's got the aptitude to cure cancer...... ​

You do know you're exactly the kind of retard I was talking about, don't you?

I'll match my body-count, against HIS.....



.....any fuckin' day.........​

 

[daveman]

Yeah.....he's got the aptitude to cure cancer...... ​

You do know you're exactly the kind of retard I was talking about, don't you?

I'll match my body-count, against HIS.....



.....any fuckin' day.........​

Yeah. How exactly does that negate your retardery?

Oh, yeah. It doesn't.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Nuclear is the way to go. It's constant, steady and doesn't need vast amounts of land.

But does nothing for the production of plastics, composites or chemicals. It also is not practical for vehicles.

I agree that we need a LOT of nuclear, oil is too important to waste on making electricity. BUT Nuclear alone isn't the answer.

Hydrogen fuel cells, photosynthesis reactors and more traditional biofuels - but these are a long way from being efficient and effective.

Oil is vital to our way of life.

We only get about 3% of our power from burning oil...and even less from renewable sources.

Half our power comes from coal. Half. Anyone who claims we can shut down coal-fired power plants and replace them with renewable sources simply isn't living in the real world.

Yeah.....just like our over-night transition, from horses to automobiles, right????

You pro-dead-tech people make some o' the worst....immature....sophomoric....arguments, ever-imaginable.

 

[daveman]

Yeah.....just like our over-night transition, from horses to automobiles, right????

You pro-dead-tech people make some o' the worst....immature....sophomoric....arguments, ever-imaginable.

Yes, it will take time. So why do you idiots want us to stop using coal and oil immediately before there is an alternative that will scale up?

 

[uscitizen]

Nuclear is the way to go. It's constant, steady and doesn't need vast amounts of land.

But does nothing for the production of plastics, composites or chemicals. It also is not practical for vehicles.

I agree that we need a LOT of nuclear, oil is too important to waste on making electricity. BUT Nuclear alone isn't the answer.

Hydrogen fuel cells, photosynthesis reactors and more traditional biofuels - but these are a long way from being efficient and effective.

Oil is vital to our way of life.

We only get about 3% of our power from burning oil...and even less from renewable sources.

Half our power comes from coal. Half. Anyone who claims we can shut down coal-fired power plants and replace them with renewable sources simply isn't living in the real world.

3.6% from other renewables and 6.9% from hydrioelectric.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

oooooooooooooooooooooooo.....yeah.....we wouldn't want to ask too-many questions about the obvious....THE WASTE!!!!!!

"The time frame in question when dealing with radioactive waste ranges from 10,000 to 1,000,000 years, according to studies based on the effect of estimated radiation doses. Researchers suggest that forecasts of health detriment for such periods should be examined critically. Practical studies only consider up to 100 years as far as effective planning and cost evaluations are concerned. Long term behavior of radioactive wastes remains a subject for ongoing research projects."

Your pain-in-the-ass formatting is exceeded only by your ignorance.

Spent nuclear fuel can be reprocessed.

Yeah....CAN be.......

Depleted Rods

 

[Mr. Shaman]

oooooooooooooooooooooooo.....yeah.....we wouldn't want to ask too-many questions about the obvious....THE WASTE!!!!!!
​

So just how many fuel rods do you think a medium sized breeder reactor goes through in a month?

Less than a million?

​

Yeah.......we've really got a shortage of them.......

​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Yeah.....just like our over-night transition, from horses to automobiles, right????

You pro-dead-tech people make some o' the worst....immature....sophomoric....arguments, ever-imaginable.

Yes, it will take time. So why do you idiots want us to stop using coal and oil immediately before there is an alternative that will scale up?

Yeah....sure....that's what we want to do.

 

[daveman]

But does nothing for the production of plastics, composites or chemicals. It also is not practical for vehicles.

I agree that we need a LOT of nuclear, oil is too important to waste on making electricity. BUT Nuclear alone isn't the answer.

Hydrogen fuel cells, photosynthesis reactors and more traditional biofuels - but these are a long way from being efficient and effective.

Oil is vital to our way of life.

We only get about 3% of our power from burning oil...and even less from renewable sources.

Half our power comes from coal. Half. Anyone who claims we can shut down coal-fired power plants and replace them with renewable sources simply isn't living in the real world.

3.6% from other renewables and 6.9% from hydrioelectric.

Yeah. What are you going to replace the 50% that comes from coal with?

 

[daveman]

oooooooooooooooooooooooo.....yeah.....we wouldn't want to ask too-many questions about the obvious....THE WASTE!!!!!!

Your pain-in-the-ass formatting is exceeded only by your ignorance.

Spent nuclear fuel can be reprocessed.

Yeah....CAN be.......

Depleted Rods

Oooh! Depleted uranium! BOOGA BOOGA!!

Meanwhile, your idiocy doesn't change the reality that spent nuclear fuel can be used again as nuclear fuel.

From my link that you didn't read:

Originally reprocessing was used solely to extract plutonium for producing nuclear weapons. With the commercialization of nuclear power, the reprocessed plutonium was recycled back into MOX nuclear fuel for thermal reactors[1]. The reprocessed uranium, which constitutes the bulk of the spent fuel material, can in principle also be re-used as fuel, but that is only economic when uranium prices are high. Finally, the breeder reactor can employ not only the recycled plutonium and uranium in spent fuel, but all the actinides, closing the nuclear fuel cycle and potentially multiplying the energy extracted from natural uranium by more than 60 times.[2] Nuclear reprocessing also reduces the volume of high-level nuclear waste and its radiotoxicity, allowing separate management (destruction or storage) of nuclear waste components.​

 

[daveman]

Yeah.....just like our over-night transition, from horses to automobiles, right????

You pro-dead-tech people make some o' the worst....immature....sophomoric....arguments, ever-imaginable.

Yes, it will take time. So why do you idiots want us to stop using coal and oil immediately before there is an alternative that will scale up?

Yeah....sure....that's what we want to do.

Yes, you do. Because you're short-sighted, and frankly, not very intelligent.

 

[JohnnyApplesack]

What if Bush actually saved us?

What if Kenneth Lay was an honest bid'ness man?

What if Tom DeLay wasn't a crook?

What if Todd Palin doesn't enjoy happy endings at the Wi Suk Japanese massage?


So many questions, so little time.

 

[rdean]

We have the technology and resources to become energy independent.

Bush and the Republicans have made sure that won't happen. They have made us completely dependent on foreign oil and, through the Bush/Cheney energy policy, they have hamstrung this country for years to come. Not only is this NOT a secret, Bush and Cheney and the Republicans are "proud" of this fact, hence, the apology to BP.

 

[daveman]

We have the technology and resources to become energy independent.

Bush and the Republicans have made sure that won't happen. They have made us completely dependent on foreign oil and, through the Bush/Cheney energy policy, they have hamstrung this country for years to come. Not only is this NOT a secret, Bush and Cheney and the Republicans are "proud" of this fact, hence, the apology to BP.

And yet the reality is it's the Democrats who have refused to let us exploit our own resources and refuse to allow us to build more nuclear plants.

There is no Magic Energy. Wake up.