http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/02/president-obama-yes-new-nukes.html

Seems big labor is smiling on these; lots of jobs for union electricians.

I have spent many years as a mud engineer and an inordinate amount of time as a well log analyst primarily responsible for analyzing core samples for the secrets they contain.

As for oil and gas. There is no danger that I will lose my job because of Barak Obama or the Greeniacs. The minute the lights go out the people will be screaming for the progressives, lets save the planets heads.

And trust me. To do what Al Gore and the IPCC wants us to do the lights most certainly will go out. There is not enough acreage to power the nation with wind and solar and then power battery cars that are lucky if they can go 50 miles before going dead.

So I do not debate AGW based upon a fear of my job. I debate it based upon a rationality of reason. Show me what will replace 650 coal fired plants that we can bring online in the next few years and Ill say problem solved.

Nuclear is the only thing that can do it and it will take 30 years to build enough plants to eliminate COAL from our power grids. By the time they build those nukes the technology will most likely have evolved in liquified coal technology to make coal 100x’s cheaper then Nuclear power.

The cost is still higher than buying juice from the electric company. And our electricity is generated using natural gas, not coal, so the savings in terms of CO2 emissions is very small.

The Greeniacs want to replace coal without anything to replace it with while to some extent oil and transportation could be replaced with Battery powered cars that in turn would then rely upon more energy to recharge millions of battery packs for 8 hours.

Nuclear could replace coal. Then we have the problem of what to do with the nuclear spent rods.

Obama is talking out his arse. The more I analyze what he is saying the more it is obvious that he is doing nothing but changing the debate in an effort to shore up moderate support for his party for the midterms without having to ante up anything.

No way….NO HOW is his side of the isle going to say…sure build them nukes.

This is all so much bunk when in reality it is the ONLY way to replace coal. Wind and solar…..after we build about a bazillion of them we might replace a couple coal plants..then we just gotta figure out how to maintain 3 million windmills and 3 million solar panels as opposed to 600 coal plants….do the math people……..

If the AGW problem was easy…it woulda been solved by now.

Producing power from solar, wind, wave, nuclear and other alternatives will be the only solution for those concerned about greenhouse gas emissions. Nuclear and clean fossil fuels (namely natural gas) are the most energy dense, and can make an impact. The other alternatives are worthwhile, and can supply an estimated 20% or so, but you need a heavy hitter like nuclear to really make a difference.

I’ve read that France has 70% of its electricity from nuclear power. They are a much smaller country (about comparable to our state of California), but we can learn from them in this regard. That is, of course, as long as Cher and Sally Fields don’t make any more movies about it.

On one hand Obama likes to give something (usually a symbol), but on the other two hands, Obama likes to slap someone down. So don’t fall for the hype- 4 years of talking about his support for nuclear likely will lead to less nuclear power.

The greeniacs want to replace oil and there is nothing to replace it.

The greeniacs want to replace coal and their is nothing to replace it.

At least in their minds.

Nuclear can replace Coal.

As of yet nothing can replace oil unless we fundamentally change our minds about how we approach battery cars.

I have posted before that just as we change batteries in our flashlights so should we change batteries in our cars at battery filling stations. Once we started on this road we could start replacing gasoline vehicles by the droves.

The Private sector has the gumption to fix whats broke if its profitable. If its not the US government has to do it for us and then they take on even further burdens that we can not afford because we are now at 14 trillion and rising fast in national debt.

Nuclear is great until the greeniacs start filing motion after motion after motion in federal court and garner the support of a sympathetic and activisit local judge.

If the AGW debate was easy to solve Im pretty sure we would have done it by now.