Comments on: American Energy Act will preserve the environment and the economy

By: DONTREADONME

DONTREADONME — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 00:54:36 +0000

By: civil_truth

civil_truth — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 00:36:02 +0000

It’s been chutzpah: years ago we made a policy to not allow reprocessing in order to send a symbolic message to the rest of the world. Because of that, opponent argue against nuclear because of the waste problem.

But, times have drasatically changed: the nuclear genie is out of the bottle, nuclear technology (peaceful and bomb making) is spreading fast among multiple countries. There’s no rational reason not to start reprocessing.

Though with this administration, anything to solve our energy issues is verboten; rather they want to price energy so high as to bankrupt us all.

By: DerKrieger

DerKrieger — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 23:13:48 +0000

if you fail to get the word out then you may as well be pissin’ in the wind. The public has to be behind this, which they would be if they knew.

By: Vladimir

Vladimir — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 22:04:32 +0000

Three snarky comments in over a year, and two of them are directed at congressional Republicans.

You don’t add much to the discussion.

By: Swamp_Yankee

Swamp_Yankee — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 21:44:41 +0000

The gentleman is reacing out to the base. Isnt that what we want. Extend him some courtesy.

By: jfahy

jfahy — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 21:40:19 +0000

Hello Fred,

We do not need an act from congress on how to supply the future energy needs of this country, Just get the hell out of the way. Private industry can and will provide what we need in terms of nuclear and our own undeveloped fossil fuels if you dopes will just get lost. And yes, the argument needs to be framed in those terms, Not the democrat terms, get tough.

By: bobojake

bobojake — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 21:22:58 +0000

There is a place for solar as a assisting source but it will remain overpriced. Signs along the Interstate where electrical power is not available is an example.
Why should taxpayers have to subsidize paying individuals putting in solar sytems for their power. It seems like its just another government dole to me.
——-
The musem in Denver where obama just had to sign the ARRA(America Rape and Reaping Act) and then obiden had his energy conference 2 or 3 weeks ago had 107 year payoff for its solar system and in it was no maintance and repair for replacing the solar panels during that period.
The farmer gave up wind mills to water their cows and provide house water years ago every chance they got when they got electricity.
Senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell of Washington State should be leading the pack in Nuclear Power Construction as in the early 80’s Washington Water Power moth-balled many plants because of the eco-freaks. Its time we spend some money on generating clean energy.
Maybe we should let people check on their electric bill if they want their electricity from solar at say 25 cents a kilowatt or from nuclear at 10 cents a kiliowatt. Customer choice.

By: Joliphant

Joliphant — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 21:06:09 +0000

In terms of electricity generation its as close to perfect as we will see for at least another 100 years. That said we need to develop our coal resources as well. We have three to four hundred years supply of coal in the ground, its criminal to get in the way of its use. Coal liquification is one of the best ways we can free ourselves from oil.

After that there is still offshore resources of Methane Hydrates we have as yet to do anything with.

I am not advocating for the government to do anything to help any of these technologies except maybe stop some of the help that has been doing such damage for so long. The best thing we could do is get the heavy hand of regulation out of these industries (I am well aware of the need to control nuclear material but that is a separate issue) and let the market pick and choose what works best.