Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: biblewonk; delacoert

Why is everyone, whether here or among the massmedia, so convinced it has to be one thing and not the other.

Why no nukes but yes windmills, or yes nukes and no windmills?

Why not yes to nukes and yes to windmills and yes to biodiesel and everything else that works?

A single-pronged approach to energy is why we're at the point where we have to have this discussion in the first place. Attack from all angles and we'll be OK.

I even like the idea of local generation, not as a replacement for big energy plants, but as a supplement. I don't see anything wrong with redundant supplies of energy, and several things right (such as not being entirely vulnerable in the event some terrorist strikes a big energy plant).


46 posted on 04/06/2005 11:41:18 AM PDT by No.6 ((www.fourthfightergroup.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]


To: No.6

I agree with you.


47 posted on 04/06/2005 11:43:07 AM PDT by delacoert (imperat animus corpori, et paretur statim: imperat animus sibi, et resistitur. -AUGUSTINI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson