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

Making it possible to build more nuclear power plants would be good for the economy AND the environment. ANWR is barren, and drilling their would not disturb the "environment" of many living creatures.
1 posted on 03/20/2009 8:48:49 AM PDT by reaganaut1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: reaganaut1

Ironically, it’s probably the same majority that voted Zero into office.


2 posted on 03/20/2009 8:51:31 AM PDT by Slapshot68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

“environmental protection” = The great modern mythology.


3 posted on 03/20/2009 8:56:44 AM PDT by EyeGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

Finally. I think Americans are just getting numb to it all and oversaturated with “green” this and “green” that.

I subscribe to a lot of fluff magazines: Redbook, Working Mother, Oprah, Time, Newsweek, Coastal Living, InStyle (yes I do read a lot of junk), and EVERY SINGLE ISSUE has articles like “The Status of the Polar Bear Green Initiative;” “How to Have a Green Valentine’s Day Party;” “Best Green Beauty Products,” etc. I skip all of them, every time, as soon as I read the word “green.”

Enough. Hopefully people are sick of the whole fad. Particularly since so many are unemployed or have lost their 401(k) value; there is no luxury of worrying about such crap anymore.


5 posted on 03/20/2009 8:57:19 AM PDT by olivia3boys
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

This poll makes Al “Manbear” Gore very sad.


6 posted on 03/20/2009 9:01:25 AM PDT by princeofdarkness ("Obama Lied. Liberty, Morality, and Prosperity Died.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

In other words, when faced with a real choice and real pain, Americans don’t think the environment is so important.


7 posted on 03/20/2009 9:02:38 AM PDT by Question_Assumptions
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

The choice between “economy” and “environmental” is a false one. Oil fields are for all intents and purposes huge wildlife refuges. You find every kind of creature living in the oilfields undisturbed. There are relatively few workers out there and they stick to the roads and the work sites; the rest of it belongs to the critters.

Nuke plants are the cleanest source of energy there is bar none.

The areas offshore where the oil is already leak oil up through the ocean floor. Drilling releaves and reduces the amount of oil leaking into the ocean.

Right now we are headed for an economic train wreck of the first order. You don’t fix an economy by printing money; printing money will destroy this economy. You fix it by building and creating, by putting people to work generating energy, infrastructure, and tangible wealth. Thats how you do it. Printing a trillion dollars and paying yourself interest on it is going to collapse this economy.


10 posted on 03/20/2009 9:17:42 AM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

Let’s not throw all the green stuff overboard. We really do need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and part of the solution can be reasonable conservation methods.

Our local energy company has backed off of including the Global Warming nonsense in their ads. They should push for lower energy consumption and we should too!


11 posted on 03/20/2009 9:19:16 AM PDT by the_Watchman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1
Obama said during the campaign he was open to nuclear power expansion if a remedy for nuclear waste could be found. Then shortly after taking office he and Congress shut down the $10 billion Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository in Nevada. The French—who apparently missed the movie, “China Syndrome”—rely on nuclear plants for 80 percent of their electric power. The French have developed a process for recycling a big portion of nuclear waste back into fuel. If the U.S. were to adopt the French recycling methods it would reduce what had to be stored at Yucca Mountain.

The unspoken problem with nuclear power generation is that it produces no CO2 and therefore can't be taxed under the upcoming carbon tax. Obama’s energy czar is Carol Browner. Energy Secretary Chu is a figurehead. Browner is closely linked to Al Gore whose Generation Investment Management LTD holds billions in now deflated EU industrial carbon credits. Gore desperately needs to unload these coupons before they shrink further. A carbon tax will create a U.S. cap-and-trade market that can be merged with the global market. Gore will have a captive U.S. market where he can reap billions.

That's what the “green” is about in the Obama/Browner/Gore crusade—”greenbacks.”

17 posted on 03/20/2009 9:33:35 AM PDT by Brad from Tennessee ("A politician can't give you anything he hasn't first stolen from you.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

In 1993 California had their big chance to vote in the mother of green initiatives, called Big Green. It was sure to be a shoe-in, but a nasty recession intervened and it lost - and that was California.

If the DEMOCRATS in Congress think that they can support Obama’s trash without feeling it at the ballot box, they are DREAMING. The only thing that can hurt the Republicans is if they go along with the Dems out of sheer STUPIDITY. They may not, for once...as the “Stimulus” bill was a good start.


18 posted on 03/20/2009 9:43:06 AM PDT by BobL (Drop a comment: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2180357/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: reaganaut1

BTTT!


26 posted on 03/21/2009 10:34:07 PM PDT by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | 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