[Matchett-PI]

I agree, but that doesn't alter the fact that we need to become energy independent to the greatest degree possible. I think we need to build more Nuclear Power plants including what we're doing with coal. (See my posts #1 & 7)

Also see:

Sunday, August 26, 2001 Los Angeles Times
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/0826-02.htm

Going Backwards - Bush's Energy Plan Bares Industry Clout
Cheney-led task force consulted extensively with corporate executives. Its findings boosted their interests. Environmental groups had little voice. by Judy Pasternak

Excerpt:

"Under President Clinton, 'coal' was a dirty word," said John Feddock, an industry analyst based in Bluefield, Va.

Not so under Bush, whose U-turn on carbon dioxide was the coal industry's biggest victory in Washington in years. .." bttt

[xzins]

I agree. I used to be anti-nuke for a couple of reasons, one personal.

Politically, however, it was the safety issue that concerned me. As I thought about it, though, it occurred to me that it wasn't terribly safe to continue funding islamo-lunatics who were using oil money to pursue/buy nuke weapons.....truly UNSAFE and UNCLEAN nuclear power.

Better to risk responsible American scientists trying to make clean electricity, than trust one-eyed Imams trying to blow up the world.

Clean nuke, indeed.