<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
	<title><![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for McCain accuses Obama of not being pro-nuclear power]]></title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.grist.org/rss/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<description>Grist Comment Feed</description>
	<language>en</language>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #1 by amazingdrx</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/debate-nukes/</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 01:37:56 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/debate-nukes/1</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>That's it</strong></p><p>Nuclear has problems that need R and D. &nbsp;McCain wants to go forward with nuclear power, giving the industry an unregulated free hand. &nbsp;</p><p>
Believing, as he does on every issue, that unregulated industry does a better job than government regulation can obtain.</p><p>
Obama will insist that the problems be solved before more nukes are built. &nbsp;With experimental reactors under government regulation and scrutiny.

<p>http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog     John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin </p></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>That's it</strong></p><p>Nuclear has problems that need R and D. &nbsp;McCain wants to go forward with nuclear power, giving the industry an unregulated free hand. &nbsp;</p><p>
Believing, as he does on every issue, that unregulated industry does a better job than government regulation can obtain.</p><p>
Obama will insist that the problems be solved before more nukes are built. &nbsp;With experimental reactors under government regulation and scrutiny.

<p>http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog     John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin </p></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #2 by PurpleOzone</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/debate-nukes/</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 04:49:39 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/debate-nukes/2</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Unregulated? But subsidized?</strong></p><p>Nuclear energy has been subsidized for 50 years and as far as I know it can't make it on its own.</p><p>
Banks won't loan the money since 3-Mile Island and Chernobyl. Three-Mile dumped $1 billion in 1979 money.</p><p>
I haven't heard any figures for how much money the U.S. government would have to put it to kick-start the construction. I've a big hunch that's what the industry wants.</p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Unregulated? But subsidized?</strong></p><p>Nuclear energy has been subsidized for 50 years and as far as I know it can't make it on its own.</p><p>
Banks won't loan the money since 3-Mile Island and Chernobyl. Three-Mile dumped $1 billion in 1979 money.</p><p>
I haven't heard any figures for how much money the U.S. government would have to put it to kick-start the construction. I've a big hunch that's what the industry wants.</p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #3 by PurpleOzone</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/debate-nukes/</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 04:52:17 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/debate-nukes/3</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Nevada politics</strong></p><p>The place to dispose of nuclear waste is Yucca mountain, Nevada, and many Nevadans are not happy with the solution. Harry Reid,NV, is Senate Majority leader and I doubt that any waste will be shipped there while he is.</p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Nevada politics</strong></p><p>The place to dispose of nuclear waste is Yucca mountain, Nevada, and many Nevadans are not happy with the solution. Harry Reid,NV, is Senate Majority leader and I doubt that any waste will be shipped there while he is.</p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #4 by Susan Kraemer</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/debate-nukes/</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 07:01:15 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/debate-nukes/4</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Nobody supports nukes as much as McCain!</strong></p><p>Even the Republicans balk at his $4 trillion dollar nukes everywhere plan. The man is a nut.</p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Nobody supports nukes as much as McCain!</strong></p><p>Even the Republicans balk at his $4 trillion dollar nukes everywhere plan. The man is a nut.</p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #5 by vakibs</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/debate-nukes/</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 08:23:53 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/debate-nukes/5</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>nuclear waste has a solution<p><br>
<b> @Purple Ozone, @Susan Kraemer  <p>
New nuclear plants, if done smartly, will cost just about 1 to 1.5 billion dollars per GW. And the latest technology (called 4th generation nuclear power) is radically different from the 2nd generation plants that we have since the 1960s and 70s. The new technology is inherently safe and does not produce nuclear waste (it actually eats existing nuclear waste to produce electricity). No radioactive material will ever have to leave the power plant. <p>
Try reading <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Prescription-Planet-Painless-Remedy-Environmental/dp/1419655825/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1222340610&amp;sr=8-1" rel="nofollow">the book of Tom Blees, you will learn a very fascinating story. <a href="http://www.skirsch.com/politics/globalwarming/ifr.htm" rel="nofollow">A short summary is &nbsp;provided on this website. 

<p>Let's think in terms of <a href="http://the-redpill.blogspot.com/2008/08/eco-dollar-future-global-currency.html" rel="nofollow">eco-dollars. </a></p></a></a></p></p></b></br></p></strong></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>nuclear waste has a solution<p><br>
<b> @Purple Ozone, @Susan Kraemer  <p>
New nuclear plants, if done smartly, will cost just about 1 to 1.5 billion dollars per GW. And the latest technology (called 4th generation nuclear power) is radically different from the 2nd generation plants that we have since the 1960s and 70s. The new technology is inherently safe and does not produce nuclear waste (it actually eats existing nuclear waste to produce electricity). No radioactive material will ever have to leave the power plant. <p>
Try reading <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Prescription-Planet-Painless-Remedy-Environmental/dp/1419655825/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1222340610&amp;sr=8-1" rel="nofollow">the book of Tom Blees, you will learn a very fascinating story. <a href="http://www.skirsch.com/politics/globalwarming/ifr.htm" rel="nofollow">A short summary is &nbsp;provided on this website. 

<p>Let's think in terms of <a href="http://the-redpill.blogspot.com/2008/08/eco-dollar-future-global-currency.html" rel="nofollow">eco-dollars. </a></p></a></a></p></p></b></br></p></strong></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #6 by SMLowry</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/debate-nukes/</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 09:58:23 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/debate-nukes/6</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Other ways</strong></p><p>I want Obama to oppose nuclear energy and I want him to oppose "clean" coal. I'm not pleased that he's made these concessions. We have to figure out other ways.</p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Other ways</strong></p><p>I want Obama to oppose nuclear energy and I want him to oppose "clean" coal. I'm not pleased that he's made these concessions. We have to figure out other ways.</p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #7 by Bob Wallace</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/debate-nukes/</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 14:43:40 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/debate-nukes/7</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Nukes are dead...</strong></p><p>They can't be built for a reasonable amount of money.</p><p>
We have less expensive and less dangerous ways to make all the power we need.</p><p>
Right now we need to build as much wind generation as we can. &nbsp;We don't yet need to worry about storage until we get to a much higher percentage of wind in the mix.</p><p>
We've got a new compressed air storage facility being built in the mid-west. &nbsp;That will serve as a lab for the additional ones we will need to build later.</p><p>
Long before a new nuclear plant could be brought o line solar prices should have dropped to about where wind is now. &nbsp;Both should be half as much or less than new nuke.</p><p>
Private money just won't finance new nuclear. &nbsp;And public resistance will probably prevent public moneys from being used.</p><p>
We really should be spending some serious money on drill-down geothermal. &nbsp;If we can make drill-down work it would give us a 24/7 steady stream source that can be located close to point of use.</p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Nukes are dead...</strong></p><p>They can't be built for a reasonable amount of money.</p><p>
We have less expensive and less dangerous ways to make all the power we need.</p><p>
Right now we need to build as much wind generation as we can. &nbsp;We don't yet need to worry about storage until we get to a much higher percentage of wind in the mix.</p><p>
We've got a new compressed air storage facility being built in the mid-west. &nbsp;That will serve as a lab for the additional ones we will need to build later.</p><p>
Long before a new nuclear plant could be brought o line solar prices should have dropped to about where wind is now. &nbsp;Both should be half as much or less than new nuke.</p><p>
Private money just won't finance new nuclear. &nbsp;And public resistance will probably prevent public moneys from being used.</p><p>
We really should be spending some serious money on drill-down geothermal. &nbsp;If we can make drill-down work it would give us a 24/7 steady stream source that can be located close to point of use.</p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #8 by Tom Blees</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/debate-nukes/</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 30 Sep 2008 11:03:33 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/debate-nukes/8</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Bob Wallace, check the numbers</strong></p><p>By T. Boone Pickens' own calculations, his wind farm that everybody's so excited about will cost about $15 billion/GW. Japan and Taiwan are building the Generation III GE ABWR nuclear reactors right now for about $1.2-1.4 billion/GW, and they are being built in 3 years. If it costs more to build them in the USA it's only because the system is totally screwed up in that it encourages private utility companies to shamelessly gouge their consumers and absurdly inflate the cost. That's not the problem with nuclear per se, that's a problem with corporate/government shenanigans. We have to get private utility companies OUT of the nuclear power business. Check out my web site, where you can read the first chapter of my book online.

<p>Tom Blees, author of
Prescription for the Planet.


"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts."</p></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Bob Wallace, check the numbers</strong></p><p>By T. Boone Pickens' own calculations, his wind farm that everybody's so excited about will cost about $15 billion/GW. Japan and Taiwan are building the Generation III GE ABWR nuclear reactors right now for about $1.2-1.4 billion/GW, and they are being built in 3 years. If it costs more to build them in the USA it's only because the system is totally screwed up in that it encourages private utility companies to shamelessly gouge their consumers and absurdly inflate the cost. That's not the problem with nuclear per se, that's a problem with corporate/government shenanigans. We have to get private utility companies OUT of the nuclear power business. Check out my web site, where you can read the first chapter of my book online.

<p>Tom Blees, author of
Prescription for the Planet.


"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts."</p></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
 </channel>
</rss>