Anything you can say about nuclear you will get much worse with ANY alternative. You understand how Hansens Peer Reviewed analysis came up with 1.8 million lives saved.
Energy Source Mortality Rate (deaths/trillionkWhr)
Coal (elect,heat,cook–world avg)--- 100,000 ( 26% of world energy, 50% of electricity)
Coal electricity – world avg--- 60,000 (26% of world energy, 50% of electricity)
Coal (elect,heat,cook – China)--- 170,000
Coal electricity- China --- 90,000
Coal – U.S.--- 15,000 (44% U.S. electricity)
Oil--- 36,000 (36% of energy, 8% of electricity)
Natural Gas--- 4,000 (20% global electricity)
Biofuel/Biomass--- 24,000 (21% global energy)
Solar (rooftop)--- 440 (0.2% global electricity)
Wind--- 150 (1.6% global electricity)
Hydro – global average--- 1,400 (15% global electricity) Nuclear – global average--- 90 (17% global electricity w/Chernobyl and Fukashima)
I can't believe these Big Oil & King Coal dupes who whine about the 1000X lower bad enviro effects of Nuclear than Fossil fuels. Solar & wind of course being just a bait-and-switch scam financed by Big Carbon & their Bankster overseers.
Nuclear actually requires very little mining, and that mining is much cleaner than any other mining except maybe diamonds. The energy density of uranium is so high, 3.3 million X greater than coal, that only tiny amounts need to be mined. In fact to supply an 80 yr lifetime of per capita USA electricity consumption would need 1.1 million lbs of mined coal (i.e. mountain top removal, giant strip mines), that's high grade bituminous coal used in US power plants, not low grade brown coal used in Germany, for instance. To obtain the same electricity from uranium, you can do that with 0.34 lbs. In fact there is enough uranium and thorium in that 1.1 million lbs of coal ash to supply 16 American's their lifetime share of electricity, burnt in high-burn GenIV reactors.
In China, the true cost of Britain's clean, green wind power experiment: Pollution on a disastrous scale:
"...This toxic lake poisons Chinese farmers, their children and their land. It is what's left behind after making the magnets for Britain's latest wind turbines... and, as a special Live investigation reveals, is merely one of a multitude of environmental sins committed in the name of our new green Jerusalem..."
In fact the radioactive thorium in the tailings or waste from the wind & solar Rare Earth mines is enough to power the entire United States, burnt in molten salt reactors like LFTR. One American with a shovel, in 3 hours can dig up enough thorium in a Rare Earth mine tailings dump to power their entire lifetime energy supply, burnt in a thorium reactor.
I'm from Colorado and I was stationed in Germany when Chernobyl blew. I personally know several workers in the nuclear field. My life experience makes me very wary of nuclear power. I find it hard to buy the anti-corporate argument for nuclear power. Who else can afford the costs?
Next we come to another hazard associated with nuclear power: RADIATION. According to the Union of Concerned Scientists: “Floods, fires and earthquakes can combine with aging facilities and error-prone humans in devastating ways.” Reactors and waste storage facilities also make ideal targets for terrorists. So tell me, Einstein: do you honestly believe these corporate hacks can be trusted to uphold the security measures needed to prevent such an attack?
Radioactive isotopes released in nuclear power plant accidents include I-131 and Cs-137, and in the worst-case scenarios such as the Chernobyl accident in 1986, other toxic isotopes such as strontium-90 and plutonium-239 may simultaneously be released. Human exposure to I-131 released from nuclear power plant accidents is attributed to contaminated water, milk and food. People are also exposed by breathing dust particles in the air, contaminated by I-131. Once inside the body, I-131 collects in the thyroid gland which uses iodine to create hormones that regulate the body’s use of energy. Since the thyroid can’t distinguish between I-131 and nonradioactive iodine, either can be absorbed, causing thyroid cancer many years later; especially for young people.
Exposure to Cs-137 can be either external or internal. External exposure occurs while walking on contaminated soil, or is caused by contact with toxic debris at nuclear accident sites. Internal exposure is caused by breathing particles in the air containing Cs-137 from contaminated soil, or ingesting contaminated water or food. Ionizing radiation released by Cs-137 exposes all organs & tissues of the body.
Workers at the nuclear facility who absorbed more than 6 “grays” of radiation, in the aftermath of the Chernobyl disaster, became ill immediately afterwards and died. The hundreds of thousands of people in the cleanup crews exposed to lower external doses of ionizing radiation (ranging from roughly 0.14 “grays” of radiation to 0.04 “grays”, between 1986 & ’89) were at risk of leukemia. The six & a half million residents of the contaminated areas surrounding Chernobyl were exposed to much lower doses of radiation between 1986 and 2005 (twenty years!). The children and teenager from that group were at high risk of developing thyroid cancer. The damage caused by I-131 has one at risk of contracting this disease for for at least twenty years after initial exposure.
According to Bernard L. Cohen, Professor at the Univerisity of Pittsburgh: “This radiation consists of subatomic particles traveling at or near the velocity o light — 186,00 miles per second. They can penetrate deep inside the human body where they can damage biological cells and thereby initiate a cancer. If they strike sex cells, they can cause genetic diseases in progeny.”
A quack-quack here and a quack-quack there….
But seriously, folks… after reading all this, I’d say that wind, solar, wave and hemp-based energy sources are all looking mighty good!
"Nutty hemp fantasy"? Gimmie a break. It doesn't get any nuttier than the quack technology you're promoting, RunOff. Doesn't get any more hypocritical either! Because no matter what you say to minimize or obscure reality, nuclear technology consumes a crapload of the fossil fuel you claim to hate so much.
What’s more, you can’t have nuclear energy without uranium mining. This spells nothing but trouble for the environment and for the humans & wildlife who live there.
I just did a google search on uranium mining and what I dug up ain’t pretty. Case in point: the Schwartzwalder Mine in Jefferson County, northwest of Denver, Colorado, in operation from 1965 until 2000. Just so happens the Schwartzwalder Mine left a big mess the Colorado Cotter Corporation has neglected to clean up or take responsibility for (surprise, surprise!). Colorado’s Dept. of Public Health & Environment has taken the Cotter Corp. to task for the environmental ruin they have caused. To this day, groundwater near the Schwartzwalder Mine is contaminated with uranium levels a thousand times higher than human health standards can absorb.
Over the past five years Cotter has come up against repeated state orders to pump and treat this toxic water, filling the mine and poisoning nearby reservoirs. For example: Ralston Creek, which flows into Denver Water’s Ralston Reservoir, is contaminated by uranium levels at 310 ppb. Cotter agreed to clean up this toxic water from the abandoned mine, but all they actually did was pump & clean surface ponds; not the poisoned water inside the mineshafts! They also ignored state orders to clean the site, refusing to pay state fines for their failure to do so. They even had the audacity to deny that the toxic water they poisoned is contaminating Ralston Creek, flat-out denying any responsibility for cleaning up their putrid goddam mess.
Concentration violations Cotter is responsible for include uranium, boron, chromium, copper, cyanide, fluride, zinc, thallium and radium 226 (YUM!). And to this day the legal battle drags on. I reckon it’s a safe bet this mess has had a negative impact on public health, as water in that mining shaft continues posing a threat to public water supplies.
The Canon City Mill site, adjacent to Canon City, Colorado, is also owned & operated by Cotter Corporation. It operated nonstop from 1958 until 1979, and has been intermittantly active since that time. Prior to 1980, Cotter Corporation dumped its uranium processing waste into “unlined bonds”, causing molybdenum, uranium and other contaminates to leach into the groundwater where it spread to Lincoln Park and local wells. They’ve been cited for numerous environmental AND labor violations while its negligence of EPA standards is ongoing. In March of ’08 Cotter pleaded guilty for the poisoning deaths of geese and other migratory birds that were killed by a solvent poisoning the pond.
Colorado remains stuck with a myriad of abandoned, inactive uranium mines these corporate hacks have neglected to clean up. Meanwhile the U.S. EPA has had the Cotter Mill on its Superfund National Priorities list since 1984.
Seems to me that YOU, RunOff, are the one shilling for the corporate elite.
A quack-quack here and a quack-quack there... ee-eye-ee-eye-ohhhhh!
Wonderland, the best argument you could come up with against nuclear is:
"...A quack-quack here and a quack-quack there... here a quack, there a quack.... ee-eye-ee-eye-ohhhh!
I don't see anyone taking your side except that wienie-sucking bimbo..."
You might want to quit at that, when you are at your best.
P.S. Big Oil and their Bankster overseers luv ya.
Making sure they can get vast wealth on their globalist, debt-engendering $US trade in Oil & Gas. Oil being the #1 component of international trade, all in their globalist $US debt currency. Wouldn't want any of that low cost, indigenous, American jobs, no globalist trade, no globalist debt, clean, green Nuclear energy.
Their MSM & Greenpace bought-and-paid-for fear mongering on the Fukushima incident made Big Oil some $352B in four years. That's just in Japan's increased fuel imports. I thought you were against global warming?
Funny how you have no problem with all that smoke, ash & GHG been pumped into Japan's atmosphere to replace stupidly shutdown zero-CO2 nuclear. And Japan having effectively sentenced to death 14,000 good citizens with the effects of those increased emissions, using WHO data on induced health effects of Coal, Oil & Gas emissions over Nuclear during those same four years.
Nuclear is not cost effective?!? Are you kidding me?
Germany, the wealthiest nation in Europe, committed to abandon Nuclear and go on a renewable energy pipe dream with a religious fervor, over 20 yrs ago. Result: in 2013 their electricity generation was 66% NG & Coal, mostly Coal with some chopped down forests mixed in to greenwash the filthy coal, 15% Nuclear, 4.3% Hydro and a whopping 14% combined Geothermal, Solar, Wind, Tidal. i.e. They still produced more from their "long abandoned" Nuclear than their massively subsidized Solar & Wind.
And they have the 2nd highest electricity prices in the EU & 2nd highest emissions in CO2/kwh generated. Indeed it has 9X the emissions per unit power of nuclear France and 5X the emissions of nuclear Ontario.
Much poorer France went from 0-70% clean nuclear electricity in 20 yrs with a mundane effort. And they are the world’s largest electricity exporter and EXPORTS as much green electricity as all of Germany’s hyped up Wind & Solar combined. France household electricity price is half that of Germany. And still managed a 4 day, max 35 hr work week, with minimum 5 weeks paid vacation. Most get 8 weeks, And the best social services in the EU, including free home doctor visits. Makes Germany look pathetic.
There is NO instance of renewable energy successfully replacing significant fossil fuels, outside of the practical conventional hydro, which is severely limited, and Iceland, the best geothermal location on the planet, has had success with geothermal low grade building heat and some electricity generation. But still gets 70% of its electricity from conventional hydro.
As for your nutty hemp fantasy. If you converted all currently utilized arable land in North America to the highest yield (higher than hemp) switchgrass production, it would not even supply 1/3rd of United States current energy consumption. And that comes with major additional caveats. Like transportation difficulties, water shortages, fertilizer shortages, low efficiency, low EROEI. Not just impractical, but flatly impossible. Give up on pipe dreams.
Here is a good article for you to learn about the harsh reality of biomass & biofuels. Called a "crazy idea". Alice Friedemann:
You've accused me of being a "corporate stooge" and a "shill for the elite" just because I'm opposed to nuclear energy. That's got to be the biggest joke of all. If the nuclear power industry isn't corporate, I don't know what is.
When it comes to this stuff, your posts are a scam and a joke. Why don't you quit while you're behind?
Quote Instant-Runoff:Climate deniers are not the big problem. Nuclear deniers are the REAL problem. Solar & wind electricity is just a scam and a joke. The only real practical renewable is conventional hydro and that is severely limited by geography. Only nuclear energy is capable of replacing fossil fuels and big carbon/big banking knows that very well. They have been using the renewable energy scam for over 30 yrs to misdirect effort from the only practical alternative to oil, gas & coal, which is of course, clean, green nuclear energy.
Instant-Runoff ~ That is the biggest joke I've ever heard. The problem with the Nuclear industry is that it is not cost effective. When you phase in the costs of disposal of waste, and decontamination of an ecosphere after an accident, the cost of nuclear energy is far greater than anything humanity can afford - even more so than fossil fuels.
Contrary to your claims, solar and wind are excellent sources of cheap renewable energy. Solar more so. In fact, all fossil fuels are is ancient storage of solar energy. There is nothing like fresh solar power to replace a large chunk of fossil fuel energy. However, you are correct in assuming that it will not replace all energy needs using chemical solar cells. That is why plant cells are also necessary.
That leads me to introduce one source you are overlooking - Hemp biomass. It is estimated by the Department of Energy that we could produce enough fuel from Hemp biomass to replace all fossil fuels in the US by only using 6% of the land of the nation. Unlike with the production of fossil fuels or nuclear energy, the only byproduct produced from growing hemp is oxygen while carbon dioxide is sucked out of and removed from the air. Hemp, unlike fossil fuels or nuclear energy, produces no unwanted by products; and, actually cleans the atmosphere reversing the greenhouse effect.
Climate deniers are not the big problem. Nuclear deniers are the REAL problem. Solar & wind electricity is just a scam and a joke. The only real practical renewable is conventional hydro and that is severely limited by geography. Only nuclear energy is capable of replacing fossil fuels and big carbon/big banking knows that very well. They have been using the renewable energy scam for over 30 yrs to misdirect effort from the only practical alternative to oil, gas & coal, which is of course, clean, green nuclear energy.
Way back in 1979 the Oil Heat Institute of Long Island financed a vicious campaign against the Nuclear power plant being built there. And in their large newspaper ads and bumper stickers slogan was SOLAR NOT NUCLEAR. Meanwhile most of Long Islands electricity came from burning oil, the rest from natural gas, they are up to 1% solar electricity now, 35 years later, no nuclear. Some success for the environment that was – a success for Big Oil.
The World's #1 Climatologist James Hansen on Big Oil's renewable energy bait-and-switch scam:
"....The tragedy is that many environmentalists line up on the side of the fossil fuel industry, advocating renewables as if they, plus energy efficiency, would solve the global climate change matter. But suggesting that renewables will let us phase rapidly off fossil fuels in the United States, China, India, or the world as a whole is almost the equivalent of believing in the Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy.
This Easter Bunny fable is the basis of 'policy' thinking of many liberal politicians. Because they realize that renewable energies are grossly inadequate for our energy needs now and in the foreseeable future and they have no real plan. They pay homage to the Easter Bunny fantasy, because it is the easy thing to do in politics.
It will be a tragedy if environmentalists allow the illusion of ‘soft’ energies to postpone demand for real solution of the energy, climate and national security problems. Solar power is just a small part of the solution. Subsidies yielding even its present tiny contribution may be unsustainable. The main conclusion is to keep an open mind. China and India will increase nuclear power use; they must if they are to phase out coal over the next few decades. It behooves us to be objective..."
Jim Hansen is telling it like it is. That's why Big Oil/Bankster sycophant Obama "resigned" him after he wrote his important paper showing nuclear energy has already saved 1.8 million lives and will save many millions more in the future.
James Lovelock, father of environmentalism:
"...Nuclear Power is the only green solution..."
The #1 Green Economist Jeffrey Sachs:
"...Nuclear power is the only solution to climate change..."
"...Sachs warned that "nice projects" around the world involving renewable power or energy efficiency would not be enough to stave off the catastrophic effects of global warming..."
World renowned environmentalist & progressive liberal George Monbiot:
"...How the Fukushima disaster taught me to stop worrying and embrace nuclear power..."
Well Chuck, apparently the Scandinavians have figured out how to regulate capitalism permanently and have the political will to do it. But that is not the case here. Our legislators do not have that political will, which is why we keep going through these eighty-year cycles. Our policians are not trustworthy. And this is why I think it must go. I'm not holding my breath, and I doubt I'll live to see it, but that's my opinion. Take it or leave it.
Where I live there is no such thing as a passing shower anymore, it's always a flash flood.....been that way since spring.
I had a beer with a woman from California last night, instead of oil, she wonders why we don't build water pipelines across the country.......giant infrastructure project to stimulate the economy.
There is nothing more important than the fight against climate change..... unless you're a short sighted selfish ass.
Chuckles, Why do you continue to make stuff up. This is from the NY Times July 16, 2009.
The abandonment of card check was another example of the power of moderate Democrats to constrain their party’s more liberal legislative efforts. Though the Democrats have a 60-40 vote advantage in the Senate, and President Obama supports the measure, several moderate Democrats opposed the card-check provision as undemocratic.
Read the whole article for yourself. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/17/business/17union.html?_r=0
The climate change deniers can roast in the wildfires, or suck the flood waters from my yard. The weather has become very weird, why can't they see that?
These corporatist politicians have fought environmental protection at every turn for thirty plus years, If we can bring change today it is probably too Damn late. The only chance I can see Is electing Bernie and putting an end to corporate pollution and extreme restructuring of or lifestyles, Even at that we have only about a 30 percent chance of avoiding the most drastic of repercussions.
AIW -- Regulated capitalism is what the Scandinavian countries have. In 2008, the CEO of IKEA was the richest man in the world. The reason we have no paid sick leave, no paid family leave, skimpy unemployment protections, no paid vacations, no paid maternity leave etc is because Reaganism loosened the regulations.
cccccttttt -- Our current govt is run by billionaires. They want to cut benefits of public service employees. They want to do this to enable the billionaires to get bigger tax cuts. What action would you suggest public service employees take?
dltownsley -- Every member of the democratic party in the senate voted for card check in 2009. Every republican voted against it. What action are you suggesting they take?
As Ken Burn's famous documentary points out, our National Parks are America's best idea. It would be the worst possible idea to let the oligarchs steal these treasures that currently belong to ALL of us for their own enrichment. I wonder how Fox News will package and sell this gem of an idea to its followers.
Chuck-- "the most beneficial economy to the lower and middle classes that has happened in the 7000 years of western civilization...." In the U.S.?! Sorry my friend, but I find that pill a little hard to swallow.
Don't get me wrong. I love Bernie's plan. But when it comes to quality of life, we pale in comparison to the Scandenavian countries. How can you insist a country that (for example) lacks a national universal single payer system of healthcare, can still claim such a grandiose mark of distinction?! I seriously question whether American workers have ever been treated with the compassion and generosity enjoyed by those In Norway or Denmark, to cite just two examples.
No paid sick leave, no paid family leave, skimpy unemployment protections, no paid vacations, no paid maternity leave, no this, no that... Gimmie a fucking break.
I don't know what kind of "details" you want, Chuck, but how about explaining to me what's so wonderful about capitalism. I repeat: politicians have proven themselves unreliable when it comes to maintaining regulations necessary to keep capitalism's predatory tendencies in check. The past several decades provide ample proof of this. Do you want me to draw you a picture?
I don't know about you, Chuck, but I'm tired of being at the mercy of whoever the next president is. With maybe the exception of Carter, every single goddam president we've had has left us worse off; more of the New Deal eroded away, more of those regulations on capitalism stripped away, leaving us more vulnerable to the whims of capitalism's fucking carnivores. Enough already.
Hell geo.mccalip, a local BIG business should do that
Anything you can say about nuclear you will get much worse with ANY alternative. You understand how Hansens Peer Reviewed analysis came up with 1.8 million lives saved.
Energy Source Mortality Rate (deaths/trillionkWhr)
Coal (elect,heat,cook–world avg)--- 100,000 ( 26% of world energy, 50% of electricity)
Coal electricity – world avg--- 60,000 (26% of world energy, 50% of electricity)
Coal (elect,heat,cook – China)--- 170,000
Coal electricity- China --- 90,000
Coal – U.S.--- 15,000 (44% U.S. electricity)
Oil--- 36,000 (36% of energy, 8% of electricity)
Natural Gas--- 4,000 (20% global electricity)
Biofuel/Biomass--- 24,000 (21% global energy)
Solar (rooftop)--- 440 (0.2% global electricity)
Wind--- 150 (1.6% global electricity)
Hydro – global average--- 1,400 (15% global electricity)
Nuclear – global average--- 90 (17% global electricity w/Chernobyl and Fukashima)
http://nextbigfuture.com/2014/01/al-gore-does-not-think-climate-change.html
I can't believe these Big Oil & King Coal dupes who whine about the 1000X lower bad enviro effects of Nuclear than Fossil fuels. Solar & wind of course being just a bait-and-switch scam financed by Big Carbon & their Bankster overseers.
Nuclear actually requires very little mining, and that mining is much cleaner than any other mining except maybe diamonds. The energy density of uranium is so high, 3.3 million X greater than coal, that only tiny amounts need to be mined. In fact to supply an 80 yr lifetime of per capita USA electricity consumption would need 1.1 million lbs of mined coal (i.e. mountain top removal, giant strip mines), that's high grade bituminous coal used in US power plants, not low grade brown coal used in Germany, for instance. To obtain the same electricity from uranium, you can do that with 0.34 lbs. In fact there is enough uranium and thorium in that 1.1 million lbs of coal ash to supply 16 American's their lifetime share of electricity, burnt in high-burn GenIV reactors.
In China, the true cost of Britain's clean, green wind power experiment: Pollution on a disastrous scale:
"...This toxic lake poisons Chinese farmers, their children and their land. It is what's left behind after making the magnets for Britain's latest wind turbines... and, as a special Live investigation reveals, is merely one of a multitude of environmental sins committed in the name of our new green Jerusalem..."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1350811/In-China-true-co...
In fact the radioactive thorium in the tailings or waste from the wind & solar Rare Earth mines is enough to power the entire United States, burnt in molten salt reactors like LFTR. One American with a shovel, in 3 hours can dig up enough thorium in a Rare Earth mine tailings dump to power their entire lifetime energy supply, burnt in a thorium reactor.
So, seeker64, you probably had an experience similar to Thom's when he went to Germany after Chernobyl.
Seeker, thanks for your input. Nothing like first-hand experience to give credability to the case against uranium mining and nuclear power!
I'm from Colorado and I was stationed in Germany when Chernobyl blew. I personally know several workers in the nuclear field. My life experience makes me very wary of nuclear power. I find it hard to buy the anti-corporate argument for nuclear power. Who else can afford the costs?
The Objectionable Duke
. . . .
David Duke:
√ A Nazi kook.
√ His Soul is a fluke.
√ Don’t give ‘im no nuke.
√ He makes us puke,
so: √ We give ‘im rebuke.
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
Next we come to another hazard associated with nuclear power: RADIATION. According to the Union of Concerned Scientists: “Floods, fires and earthquakes can combine with aging facilities and error-prone humans in devastating ways.” Reactors and waste storage facilities also make ideal targets for terrorists. So tell me, Einstein: do you honestly believe these corporate hacks can be trusted to uphold the security measures needed to prevent such an attack?
Radioactive isotopes released in nuclear power plant accidents include I-131 and Cs-137, and in the worst-case scenarios such as the Chernobyl accident in 1986, other toxic isotopes such as strontium-90 and plutonium-239 may simultaneously be released. Human exposure to I-131 released from nuclear power plant accidents is attributed to contaminated water, milk and food. People are also exposed by breathing dust particles in the air, contaminated by I-131. Once inside the body, I-131 collects in the thyroid gland which uses iodine to create hormones that regulate the body’s use of energy. Since the thyroid can’t distinguish between I-131 and nonradioactive iodine, either can be absorbed, causing thyroid cancer many years later; especially for young people.
Exposure to Cs-137 can be either external or internal. External exposure occurs while walking on contaminated soil, or is caused by contact with toxic debris at nuclear accident sites. Internal exposure is caused by breathing particles in the air containing Cs-137 from contaminated soil, or ingesting contaminated water or food. Ionizing radiation released by Cs-137 exposes all organs & tissues of the body.
Workers at the nuclear facility who absorbed more than 6 “grays” of radiation, in the aftermath of the Chernobyl disaster, became ill immediately afterwards and died. The hundreds of thousands of people in the cleanup crews exposed to lower external doses of ionizing radiation (ranging from roughly 0.14 “grays” of radiation to 0.04 “grays”, between 1986 & ’89) were at risk of leukemia. The six & a half million residents of the contaminated areas surrounding Chernobyl were exposed to much lower doses of radiation between 1986 and 2005 (twenty years!). The children and teenager from that group were at high risk of developing thyroid cancer. The damage caused by I-131 has one at risk of contracting this disease for for at least twenty years after initial exposure.
According to Bernard L. Cohen, Professor at the Univerisity of Pittsburgh: “This radiation consists of subatomic particles traveling at or near the velocity o light — 186,00 miles per second. They can penetrate deep inside the human body where they can damage biological cells and thereby initiate a cancer. If they strike sex cells, they can cause genetic diseases in progeny.”
A quack-quack here and a quack-quack there….
But seriously, folks… after reading all this, I’d say that wind, solar, wave and hemp-based energy sources are all looking mighty good!
Maniac, a Megalo
. . .
Trump is a maniac of megalo proportions,
yet the Far-Rightists LIKE his grotesque contortions.
Please, may the Far-Right volunteer for self-abortions
from the G.O.P. womb where they grow their distortions.
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
"Nutty hemp fantasy"? Gimmie a break. It doesn't get any nuttier than the quack technology you're promoting, RunOff. Doesn't get any more hypocritical either! Because no matter what you say to minimize or obscure reality, nuclear technology consumes a crapload of the fossil fuel you claim to hate so much.
What’s more, you can’t have nuclear energy without uranium mining. This spells nothing but trouble for the environment and for the humans & wildlife who live there.
I just did a google search on uranium mining and what I dug up ain’t pretty. Case in point: the Schwartzwalder Mine in Jefferson County, northwest of Denver, Colorado, in operation from 1965 until 2000. Just so happens the Schwartzwalder Mine left a big mess the Colorado Cotter Corporation has neglected to clean up or take responsibility for (surprise, surprise!). Colorado’s Dept. of Public Health & Environment has taken the Cotter Corp. to task for the environmental ruin they have caused. To this day, groundwater near the Schwartzwalder Mine is contaminated with uranium levels a thousand times higher than human health standards can absorb.
Over the past five years Cotter has come up against repeated state orders to pump and treat this toxic water, filling the mine and poisoning nearby reservoirs. For example: Ralston Creek, which flows into Denver Water’s Ralston Reservoir, is contaminated by uranium levels at 310 ppb. Cotter agreed to clean up this toxic water from the abandoned mine, but all they actually did was pump & clean surface ponds; not the poisoned water inside the mineshafts! They also ignored state orders to clean the site, refusing to pay state fines for their failure to do so. They even had the audacity to deny that the toxic water they poisoned is contaminating Ralston Creek, flat-out denying any responsibility for cleaning up their putrid goddam mess.
Concentration violations Cotter is responsible for include uranium, boron, chromium, copper, cyanide, fluride, zinc, thallium and radium 226 (YUM!). And to this day the legal battle drags on. I reckon it’s a safe bet this mess has had a negative impact on public health, as water in that mining shaft continues posing a threat to public water supplies.
The Canon City Mill site, adjacent to Canon City, Colorado, is also owned & operated by Cotter Corporation. It operated nonstop from 1958 until 1979, and has been intermittantly active since that time. Prior to 1980, Cotter Corporation dumped its uranium processing waste into “unlined bonds”, causing molybdenum, uranium and other contaminates to leach into the groundwater where it spread to Lincoln Park and local wells. They’ve been cited for numerous environmental AND labor violations while its negligence of EPA standards is ongoing. In March of ’08 Cotter pleaded guilty for the poisoning deaths of geese and other migratory birds that were killed by a solvent poisoning the pond.
Colorado remains stuck with a myriad of abandoned, inactive uranium mines these corporate hacks have neglected to clean up. Meanwhile the U.S. EPA has had the Cotter Mill on its Superfund National Priorities list since 1984.
Seems to me that YOU, RunOff, are the one shilling for the corporate elite.
A quack-quack here and a quack-quack there... ee-eye-ee-eye-ohhhhh!
Wonderland, the best argument you could come up with against nuclear is:
"...A quack-quack here and a quack-quack there... here a quack, there a quack.... ee-eye-ee-eye-ohhhh!
I don't see anyone taking your side except that wienie-sucking bimbo..."
You might want to quit at that, when you are at your best.
P.S. Big Oil and their Bankster overseers luv ya.
Making sure they can get vast wealth on their globalist, debt-engendering $US trade in Oil & Gas. Oil being the #1 component of international trade, all in their globalist $US debt currency. Wouldn't want any of that low cost, indigenous, American jobs, no globalist trade, no globalist debt, clean, green Nuclear energy.
Their MSM & Greenpace bought-and-paid-for fear mongering on the Fukushima incident made Big Oil some $352B in four years. That's just in Japan's increased fuel imports. I thought you were against global warming?
Funny how you have no problem with all that smoke, ash & GHG been pumped into Japan's atmosphere to replace stupidly shutdown zero-CO2 nuclear. And Japan having effectively sentenced to death 14,000 good citizens with the effects of those increased emissions, using WHO data on induced health effects of Coal, Oil & Gas emissions over Nuclear during those same four years.
Nuclear is not cost effective?!? Are you kidding me?
Germany, the wealthiest nation in Europe, committed to abandon Nuclear and go on a renewable energy pipe dream with a religious fervor, over 20 yrs ago. Result: in 2013 their electricity generation was 66% NG & Coal, mostly Coal with some chopped down forests mixed in to greenwash the filthy coal, 15% Nuclear, 4.3% Hydro and a whopping 14% combined Geothermal, Solar, Wind, Tidal. i.e. They still produced more from their "long abandoned" Nuclear than their massively subsidized Solar & Wind.
And they have the 2nd highest electricity prices in the EU & 2nd highest emissions in CO2/kwh generated. Indeed it has 9X the emissions per unit power of nuclear France and 5X the emissions of nuclear Ontario.
Much poorer France went from 0-70% clean nuclear electricity in 20 yrs with a mundane effort. And they are the world’s largest electricity exporter and EXPORTS as much green electricity as all of Germany’s hyped up Wind & Solar combined. France household electricity price is half that of Germany. And still managed a 4 day, max 35 hr work week, with minimum 5 weeks paid vacation. Most get 8 weeks, And the best social services in the EU, including free home doctor visits. Makes Germany look pathetic.
There is NO instance of renewable energy successfully replacing significant fossil fuels, outside of the practical conventional hydro, which is severely limited, and Iceland, the best geothermal location on the planet, has had success with geothermal low grade building heat and some electricity generation. But still gets 70% of its electricity from conventional hydro.
As for your nutty hemp fantasy. If you converted all currently utilized arable land in North America to the highest yield (higher than hemp) switchgrass production, it would not even supply 1/3rd of United States current energy consumption. And that comes with major additional caveats. Like transportation difficulties, water shortages, fertilizer shortages, low efficiency, low EROEI. Not just impractical, but flatly impossible. Give up on pipe dreams.
Here is a good article for you to learn about the harsh reality of biomass & biofuels. Called a "crazy idea". Alice Friedemann:
http://energyskeptic.com/2015/peaksoil/
Instant-RunOff, here we go again.
You've accused me of being a "corporate stooge" and a "shill for the elite" just because I'm opposed to nuclear energy. That's got to be the biggest joke of all. If the nuclear power industry isn't corporate, I don't know what is.
When it comes to this stuff, your posts are a scam and a joke. Why don't you quit while you're behind?
Instant-Runoff ~ That is the biggest joke I've ever heard. The problem with the Nuclear industry is that it is not cost effective. When you phase in the costs of disposal of waste, and decontamination of an ecosphere after an accident, the cost of nuclear energy is far greater than anything humanity can afford - even more so than fossil fuels.
Contrary to your claims, solar and wind are excellent sources of cheap renewable energy. Solar more so. In fact, all fossil fuels are is ancient storage of solar energy. There is nothing like fresh solar power to replace a large chunk of fossil fuel energy. However, you are correct in assuming that it will not replace all energy needs using chemical solar cells. That is why plant cells are also necessary.
That leads me to introduce one source you are overlooking - Hemp biomass. It is estimated by the Department of Energy that we could produce enough fuel from Hemp biomass to replace all fossil fuels in the US by only using 6% of the land of the nation. Unlike with the production of fossil fuels or nuclear energy, the only byproduct produced from growing hemp is oxygen while carbon dioxide is sucked out of and removed from the air. Hemp, unlike fossil fuels or nuclear energy, produces no unwanted by products; and, actually cleans the atmosphere reversing the greenhouse effect.
But don't take my word for it...
http://truedemocracyparty.net/2014/07/hemponal-hemp-based-alcohol-fuels-hemp-fuel-the-way-out-of-foreign-oil-dependency-refuel-america-campaign-pt-1-google-mainstream-media-censorship-level-highactive/
http://dailynexus.com/2011-04-18/hemp-potentially-replace-reliance-fossil-fuels/
http://thehempsolution.blogspot.com/
Climate deniers are not the big problem. Nuclear deniers are the REAL problem. Solar & wind electricity is just a scam and a joke. The only real practical renewable is conventional hydro and that is severely limited by geography. Only nuclear energy is capable of replacing fossil fuels and big carbon/big banking knows that very well. They have been using the renewable energy scam for over 30 yrs to misdirect effort from the only practical alternative to oil, gas & coal, which is of course, clean, green nuclear energy.
Way back in 1979 the Oil Heat Institute of Long Island financed a vicious campaign against the Nuclear power plant being built there. And in their large newspaper ads and bumper stickers slogan was SOLAR NOT NUCLEAR. Meanwhile most of Long Islands electricity came from burning oil, the rest from natural gas, they are up to 1% solar electricity now, 35 years later, no nuclear. Some success for the environment that was – a success for Big Oil.
http://atomicinsights.com/smoking-gun-part-18-an-oldie-but-a-goodie-oil-heat-institute-of-long-island-ad-using-scare-tactics-to-fight-shoreham/
The World's #1 Climatologist James Hansen on Big Oil's renewable energy bait-and-switch scam:
"....The tragedy is that many environmentalists line up on the side of the fossil fuel industry, advocating renewables as if they, plus energy efficiency, would solve the global climate change matter. But suggesting that renewables will let us phase rapidly off fossil fuels in the United States, China, India, or the world as a whole is almost the equivalent of believing in the Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy.
This Easter Bunny fable is the basis of 'policy' thinking of many liberal politicians. Because they realize that renewable energies are grossly inadequate for our energy needs now and in the foreseeable future and they have no real plan. They pay homage to the Easter Bunny fantasy, because it is the easy thing to do in politics.
It will be a tragedy if environmentalists allow the illusion of ‘soft’ energies to postpone demand for real solution of the energy, climate and national security problems. Solar power is just a small part of the solution. Subsidies yielding even its present tiny contribution may be unsustainable. The main conclusion is to keep an open mind. China and India will increase nuclear power use; they must if they are to phase out coal over the next few decades. It behooves us to be objective..."
Jim Hansen is telling it like it is. That's why Big Oil/Bankster sycophant Obama "resigned" him after he wrote his important paper showing nuclear energy has already saved 1.8 million lives and will save many millions more in the future.
James Lovelock, father of environmentalism:
"...Nuclear Power is the only green solution..."
The #1 Green Economist Jeffrey Sachs:
"...Nuclear power is the only solution to climate change..."
"...Sachs warned that "nice projects" around the world involving renewable power or energy efficiency would not be enough to stave off the catastrophic effects of global warming..."
World renowned environmentalist & progressive liberal George Monbiot:
"...How the Fukushima disaster taught me to stop worrying and embrace nuclear power..."
Well Chuck, apparently the Scandinavians have figured out how to regulate capitalism permanently and have the political will to do it. But that is not the case here. Our legislators do not have that political will, which is why we keep going through these eighty-year cycles. Our policians are not trustworthy. And this is why I think it must go. I'm not holding my breath, and I doubt I'll live to see it, but that's my opinion. Take it or leave it.
Where I live there is no such thing as a passing shower anymore, it's always a flash flood.....been that way since spring.
I had a beer with a woman from California last night, instead of oil, she wonders why we don't build water pipelines across the country.......giant infrastructure project to stimulate the economy.
There is nothing more important than the fight against climate change..... unless you're a short sighted selfish ass.
Chuckles, Why do you continue to make stuff up. This is from the NY Times July 16, 2009.
The abandonment of card check was another example of the power of moderate Democrats to constrain their party’s more liberal legislative efforts. Though the Democrats have a 60-40 vote advantage in the Senate, and President Obama supports the measure, several moderate Democrats opposed the card-check provision as undemocratic.
Read the whole article for yourself. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/17/business/17union.html?_r=0
The climate change deniers can roast in the wildfires, or suck the flood waters from my yard. The weather has become very weird, why can't they see that?
On the other hand, wildfires help some aspects of the ecosystem.
These corporatist politicians have fought environmental protection at every turn for thirty plus years, If we can bring change today it is probably too Damn late. The only chance I can see Is electing Bernie and putting an end to corporate pollution and extreme restructuring of or lifestyles, Even at that we have only about a 30 percent chance of avoiding the most drastic of repercussions.
AIW -- Regulated capitalism is what the Scandinavian countries have. In 2008, the CEO of IKEA was the richest man in the world. The reason we have no paid sick leave, no paid family leave, skimpy unemployment protections, no paid vacations, no paid maternity leave etc is because Reaganism loosened the regulations.
That should have been RLTOWNSLEY not dltownsley. Sorry.
cccccttttt -- Our current govt is run by billionaires. They want to cut benefits of public service employees. They want to do this to enable the billionaires to get bigger tax cuts. What action would you suggest public service employees take?
dltownsley -- Every member of the democratic party in the senate voted for card check in 2009. Every republican voted against it. What action are you suggesting they take?
As Ken Burn's famous documentary points out, our National Parks are America's best idea. It would be the worst possible idea to let the oligarchs steal these treasures that currently belong to ALL of us for their own enrichment. I wonder how Fox News will package and sell this gem of an idea to its followers.
Chuck-- "the most beneficial economy to the lower and middle classes that has happened in the 7000 years of western civilization...." In the U.S.?! Sorry my friend, but I find that pill a little hard to swallow.
Don't get me wrong. I love Bernie's plan. But when it comes to quality of life, we pale in comparison to the Scandenavian countries. How can you insist a country that (for example) lacks a national universal single payer system of healthcare, can still claim such a grandiose mark of distinction?! I seriously question whether American workers have ever been treated with the compassion and generosity enjoyed by those In Norway or Denmark, to cite just two examples.
No paid sick leave, no paid family leave, skimpy unemployment protections, no paid vacations, no paid maternity leave, no this, no that... Gimmie a fucking break.
I don't know what kind of "details" you want, Chuck, but how about explaining to me what's so wonderful about capitalism. I repeat: politicians have proven themselves unreliable when it comes to maintaining regulations necessary to keep capitalism's predatory tendencies in check. The past several decades provide ample proof of this. Do you want me to draw you a picture?
I don't know about you, Chuck, but I'm tired of being at the mercy of whoever the next president is. With maybe the exception of Carter, every single goddam president we've had has left us worse off; more of the New Deal eroded away, more of those regulations on capitalism stripped away, leaving us more vulnerable to the whims of capitalism's fucking carnivores. Enough already.