[Jedi Master Pikachu]

California has already decided against more nuclear power plants.

[Jedi Master Pikachu]

While the United States has a lot of coal (around a fourth of the global total), the country has a lot of uranium, and its allies, Canada and Australia also have more.

Nuclear power probably won't directly remove dependence on countries in Southwest Asia and Venezuela for oil, as only a tiny fraction of electricity production (to be used to send electricity to houses and buildings, etc.) is from oil.

[Waco]

More (9'11's are Okey dokey,, but NO MORE nuke power plats,,,they're dangerous.

[ASOC]

" virtually eliminate the threat of a meltdown of the nuclear core.

I dunno, sounds like the EOD motto.....

[Sunnyvale CA Eng.]

..Among them is Portland attorney Greg Kafoury, a veteran of battles against atomic power in the Pacific Northwest. "We were promised that the plants could not explode and we got Chernobyl," Kafoury said. "We were told they could not melt down and we got Three Mile Island. Now the industry says they can get it right. Why on Earth should anybody believe them?"

One of thousands of vampire bat attorneys waiting to slam the brakes on new nuke construction. The utilities and plant manufacturers better have a plan on how to deal with guys like this or there will be no new plants.

[Wonder Warthog]

"The system eliminates the need for huge cooling towers, redundant pumps and backup diesel generators."

Totally wrong. There will still need to be cooling towers for the operation of the reactor (that heat has to go to the environment somehow). All that "passive safety" means is that those cooling towers can be somewhat smaller and of different design. There will still need to be redundant pumps--just fewer of them. Same for the backup diesel generators--the instrumentation will still need electric power when the reactor goes down--so the only effect is that the backup generators can be smaller and cheaper.

Why can't reporters EVER get the story straight!!!!