Posted on 08/11/2004 5:33:30 AM PDT by OESY
If Kerry is serious about global warming, he'd know that the best solution is to build a lot more nuclear power plants. But I don't think he's serious about the issue.
This boob will say ANYTHING to get a vote..
Open storage on MA is an alternative. ;~)
ANother redeeming message from Jf'nCury.
No Mr. Kerry, YOU are the symbol of recklessness and arrogance.
I'd like to see it dumped in Massachusetts, around his home.
He'll get votes in Nevada with this one. It's a hot issue. (No pun intended). I'd love to know what his alternative is.
This will be yet another Flip-Flop for Mr. Kerry. I'm off to work, but hopefully someone will post all the bills he voted in favor of this and would not help to stop it.
Out of sight, out of mind. No, Yucca mountain is not an ideal repository (I did a paper on this). But it's the best one that we have and we're not likely to find others unless we can achieve interplanetary travel and dump it in Venus. Meanwhile the Democrats want to defund NASA -plus- they would be content to let it sit for all eternity in some basement. Sigh...
kerry promised not to send it there after he promised he would.
As far as I know there is no suitable alternative anywhere in the USA... none, zilch, zip.
I doubt this will flip Nevada over to Kerry... IIRC, this issue existed before 2000.
Mr Kerry reliably voted against this before he voted for it.
Go here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1189167/posts
Kerry thinks it's much safer to keep nuclear waste in outdoor pools that in which a bezerk Islamist on an aircraft can immolate himslef in and contaminate a wide area.
Great idea! Does Kerry's house have a basement????
Since you're obviously up to snuff on this, do you know how much money has been spent to analyze and prepare this site for long-range storage?
Yes it is Senator.
Its about promises that the Federal Government to nuclear power plant operators.
Its about a promise to build them a permanent repository.
Its about a promise made to those nuclear power plants that have pre-paid billions of dollars to the Federal government to construct a storage facility.
Its about a guarantee that those nuclear power plants will sue the government for many billions of dollars for breach of contract.
Its about a promise to keep Americans safe from terrorists. Distributing nuclear waste in hundreds of sheet metal buildings around the country is not safe, Senator.
Perhaps the Yucca site will not last 10,000 years. Perhaps it will. But I do know that Islam will not last 10,000 years and Yucca is a great place to keep this hazardous stuff until Islam burns itself out.
Storage is not the only issue plaguing nuclear power plants
Deregulation changed the nuclear power equation for good. "In this new competitive generation market, investors don't have any guarantees that the construction costs will ever be recouped," explains Jerry Taylor of the Cato Institute... "No matter how many subsidies we throw at this technology, we're not going to tempt many investors to build nuclear power plants when cheaper alternatives are in front of them." ...But as a strict free-marketeer, he thinks conservatives have "a soft spot in their heads" when it comes to nukes. "If nuclear power can pay for itself over time, then it doesn't need any government help, welfare, subsidy, or anything else," he says. "It seems clear to me that were it not for large and historically important federal subsidies, there wouldn't be a single nuclear power plant in the United States."
It is estimated that new plant construction would have to be subsidized by the federal government at a 50% rate. We're talking BILLIONS.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.