Lizzie asks…
Shouldn’t the debate about “Nuclear” energy be over? Natural disasters are part of Nature.. Atom Splitting ?
Not so much?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/as_japan_earthquake
If California had a 9 pointer which it may well at any moment.. all the power plants. refineries, military installations would be suffering the exact same thing.. so far the Japanese have been selective on which data they release.. but anyone paying attention will recognize the flow of info as controlled.. Reality is, even if the explosion helped diminish the radioactivity .. and that’s a big if…
It’s still pure luck of the draw…
Nuclear power is not clean or safe and isn’t it time we start moving away from polluting destructive forms of energy?
Tidal, geothermal,solar, wind and hydro, …. despite what the energy industry and their advertising dollars and pundits will tell you, is the solution to the worlds energy needs.
If the United States as an example stopped spending trillions on “securing Americas business assets” in Southeast Asia and instead began an international initiative to migrate to 100% renewable and alternative energy by 2030… the whole world would follow suit. How do I know? Because War is only good for a very small group of manufacturers and types of business.. if we moved to a technology based manufacturing economy with “New Energy” as the mantra.. America would once again return to it’s 1st world leading status… as opposed to becoming the worlds largest debtor.
” I think that the US, which is in a very stable area”
The California quake in LA back in 94 was a 7.9.. the strongest ever felt there was a “9” in the cascadia region (Northern California) http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/states/events/1700_01_26.php
So what’s shoddy about my education? And what great scientific knowledge do you posses?
I grew up in the shadow of “Indian Point” google it.. I’ve been around nuclear power for 45 years.. I probably know more about the workings of the various kinds of reactors than anyone in this room short of a nuclear physicist..
The “built in safety measures” require electricity to function.. the power was interrupted and that is what caused the super heating in the first place… are you saying that Mankind has ever once in our history designed one single thing that is foolproof?
The Expert answers:
Don’t be ridiculous, Japan’s reactor did not spew radioactivity. It was contained through built in safety measures.
In Japan, which is in a very active area for earthquakes, can manage to have safe nuclear power, I think that the US, which is in a very stable area, can manage to have it as well. Europe does well
on Nuclear power.
I know there is a tendency amongst the scientifically uneducated to be afraid of technology like nuclear power. I blame the shoddy educational system for that ignorance. An ignorance that has cost many people their lives through pollution given out by conventional power plants.
Michael asks…
Do you agree with McCain’s claim that Sarah Palin knows more about energy than anyone else in the USA?
When asked about Palin’s national security credentials. McCain’s answer was “Energy….She knows more about energy than probably anyone else in the United States of America.”
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2008/9/11/101042/343
This is the same Sarah Palin who thinks Iran controls 20% of the world’s energy supply
http://climateprogress.org/2008/09/04/most-revealing-palin-energy-whopper-iran-could-cut-off-a-fifth-of-the-worlds-energy-supplies/
and who said:
“alternative–energy solutions are far from imminent and would require more than 10 years to develop.”
http://www.charleston.net/news/2008/aug/16/alaska_gov_wants_tap_oil_resources51051/
“I beg to disagree with any candidate who would say we can’t drill our way out of our problem”
http://www.omgili.com/newsgroups/talk/environment/C49F02AA10FDCleonard78spprimusca.html
Do you agree that Sarah Palin knows more about energy than anyone else in the USA, or has the Straight Talk Express broken down?
The Expert answers:
I think he meant to say: “Energy policy is the only arena in which she has any experience, so she will try to answer all questions as if they were energy-related.” Of course, as you point out, she’s not so hot on energy policy either…
Sharon asks…
If drilling more oil is not the answer. Tell me wich of the following alternative should we use?
Some one tell me witch Alternative energy sorce we should use! The dems Go on and on
about useing alternatives but then Try to stop these also! So what are we to do? Can someone explain this to me?
Windmills:
Storm Over Mass. Windmill Plan
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/26/sunday/main560595.shtml
Wind Farms Face Green Resistance
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/01/07/tech/main535607.shtml
Altamont Pass so dangerous for birds of prey?
http://www.audubonmagazine.org/features0609/energy.html
Wind mills take Acers and Acers of land to prdouce the same as one Oil Well wich is more environmently freindly? And witch will be more harmful to animal speicies in the areas?
Solar:
Hearings to debate impact of solar farms on threatened species
http://www.pe.com/localnews/inland/stories/PE_News_Local_S_solar15.48dbdb9.html
Solar farms’ impact to be explained
http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/environment/246916
Solar panels take Acers and Acers of land to prdouce the same
as one Oil Well wich is more environmently freindly? And witch will be more harmful to animal speicies in the areas?
hydroelectric:
The fates of salmon and hydroelectric production lie in the hands of a federal judge
http://www.idahostatesman.com/235/story/202025.html
Threatened and Endangered Fishes
http://www.fish.state.pa.us/anglerboater/2000/ab91000/tefishes.pdf
So if Obama is elcted Witch will he push for?
Realy I am God the Libs say it is to dangerous. And the waste is not enviromentaly safe that is why there are no New nuclear plants
I see again the dems instead of looking at facts and answeringa question are far mor concerned about if I know the diference detween Witch and which its no wounder dms never get anything done. look for something small and ignore thebigger qeustion. That your average dem for ya!!
zorrothe well that is a nice dream but the batteries in these cars last about 3-5 years and coast $3000 to replace then you will have the enviromentalists complaining about the cemical toll this is taking on our enviroment!!
The Expert answers:
The only power capable of relieving the base load (that is constant and reliable energy that you could build an entire grid off of) is Nuclear.
Wind has a bad habit on not being there when or where you need it. It is only suitable to compliment the base load.
Even at 100% efficiency, Solar will never be able to produce enough power per square ft. There simply isn’t enough power in sunlight.
Paul asks…
Where can one find authentic left-wing news sources which aren’t just LIBERALS masquerading as LEFTIST?
I’m talking about those that are :
1] neutral or deferential towards labor if not pro-worker, pro-organized labor, and/or pro-union
2] vigilant if not highly critical towards big business, corporate, Wall St interests, or those groups guided by profit motivation
3] pro-peace, antiwar, neutral, won’t cheer-lead government war efforts, won’t rely on “embedded” reporting, will report body counts on both sides
4] neutral or are able to report positive things about the US governments purported enemies or those nations or leaders which the USA’s mainstream media chooses to deride or do biased coverage
5] critical of privately insured health care and respects public health care arguments (single payer, universal, socialized)
6] pro: environment, small business, small media, net neutrality, abortion choice, alternative energy, fair elections,
7] pro-whisteblower (like Wikileaks)
8] pro-justice for those victims hurt by US policies
or report for those that are most vulnerable because of :
war, war crimes, the drug war, the war on “terror”, those low income or poor, joblessness, homelessness, no health coverage, sickness, incarceration, no legal assistance, etc.
If news sources have few (if any) of the above criteria, then they would appear to be adhering to (or towing) the mainstream line or parameters of reporting, analysis, and discussion. This means we won’t hear reports on the evil-doings of US and/or Western imperialism or such imperialist behavior (by “Marxist” definition).
Mainstream reporting is usually construed as either liberal or conservative and are often thought of as two sides to the same coin. That is because they are different only in tone and rhetoric and a few domestic issues, but are dramatically similar in foreign policy regarding international relations, business, war policy & interventions, protecting Wall Street investment or “interests” and all the skulduggery involved in it.
The Expert answers:
Democracy Now mostly fits this:
http://www.democracynow.org/
Carol asks…
Why do Conservatives fail to understand that preferential treatment and state subsidization of established?
industries, combined with an utter disregard for the potential of new technologies, and reinforcement of party viewpoints via a major media outlet is one of the textbook elements of Fascist Socialism?
When FOX News tells you that we should let the oil companies have their tax breaks but we should ignore alternative energy because if it doesn’t work now then it obviously never will, that’s Fascist Socialism. In a Democratic society all technologies should be given equal consideration and time to achieve a state of technological development. As technologies mature the amount of government sponsorship devoted to that industry is based upon expectations of economic growth to be derived from that technology.
The Expert answers:
They don’t fail to understand it, at least not the so-called “conservative,” Republikkkan and Tea-tard leaders.
They support and promote it.
As for the working class people who support these positions, they’re racists/white supremacists, homophobes, hypocritical bible thumpers and/or willfully ignorant morons.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers