The Environmental Candidate

[Mycroft]

McCain says wants 45 new nuclear reactors by 2030

And 100 ultimately.

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSWBT00921120080618?feedType=nl&feedName=ustopnewsevening


Finally someone willing to transition us to clean non-carbon emitting sources of power!

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Nuclear power represents more than 70 percent of our non-carbon generated electricity. It is unlikely that we can meet our aggressive climate goals if we eliminate nuclear power from the table. However, there is no future for expanded nuclear without first addressing four key issues: public right-to-know, security of nuclear fuel and waste, waste storage, and proliferation.

And opposition to Yucca storage keeps on growing.

 

[BPSCG]

And opposition to Yucca storage keeps on growing.

Yes, it's better that we continue to send billions of dollars overseas every year to messianic people who hate us with a passion and are using the money we send them to build nuclear weapons and intercontinental ballistic missiles (no doubt for peaceful purposes), than it is to bury nuclear waste in a geologically dormant mountain in the middle of the stinking desert because Harry Reid wants to get re-elected.

 

[corplinx]

How can a president make nuclear energy happen? I always hear about how we can't build nuclear plants but noone lays out how, why, or how to remedy. Whenever nuclear comes up, we hear the same 'its the hippies and democrats fault we don't have more reactors'. We don't actually hear the actual reasons preventing us from going forward.

I am all for nuclear power. Of course, Iran is one of the largest sources of uranium are they not? Is there a benefit here in the "trade dollars instead of missiles" form of diplomacy? Would we be under Iran's thumb? There's much about nuclear I don't know.

Call me skeptical about McCain being able to push reactors out the door. Unless he made energy a national emergency of some kind to be able to ignore lawuits and such to get them built and operational.

 

[Kerberos]

How can a president make nuclear energy happen? I always hear about how we can't build nuclear plants but noone lays out how, why, or how to remedy. Whenever nuclear comes up, we hear the same 'its the hippies and democrats fault we don't have more reactors'. We don't actually hear the actual reasons preventing us from going forward.

I am all for nuclear power. Of course, Iran is one of the largest sources of uranium are they not? Is there a benefit here in the "trade dollars instead of missiles" form of diplomacy? Would we be under Iran's thumb? There's much about nuclear I don't know.

Call me skeptical about McCain being able to push reactors out the door. Unless he made energy a national emergency of some kind to be able to ignore lawuits and such to get them built and operational.

"The distribution of uranium ore deposits is widespread, with sizeable deposits and mines in Australia (40% of EDR[1]), Canada, former Soviet republics, Africa and South America."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_deposits

"Uranium mining is presently carried out in more than 25 countries around the world. An estimated 100 or more uranium mines in different stages of development are reported. Major uranium mines are located in Canada, Australia and Kazakhstan that contribute more than half of world's uranium production."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_uranium_mines

Iran has a single mine, but you quite clearly wouldn't be dependent on them.

 

[corplinx]

Thanks