"other forms of energy" Hmmm, funny you don't just say oil. Or perhaps there is something I don't know and I should take the term "Light Brigade" more literally? Was the war over all that Silicon in the sand to make Solar Cells?
Of course oil can't be replaced by Nuclear, since we aren't about to drive nuclear powered cars. But we can switch to electric cars, but why of all the options is nuclear better than "other forms of energy" just as solar, wind, hydro, wave, tide, biofuel and true alternatives such as what this list is dedicated to? And what about the other issues around Nuclear power, the waste that is a huge problem that will be around forever on a human time scale and as long as Nuclear power is used the problem will grow. Then what about the fact that if Nuclear is the only supported option then many countries will take it up and that leads directly into Nuclear Weapon programs. (*Each year a typical 1000 mega-watt (MW) commercial power reactor will produce 300 to 500 pounds of plutonium -- enough to build between 25 - 40 Nagasaki-sized atomic bombs.*) And then if a natural or man made disaster occurs a meltdown can't be stopped and spews radioactive waste everywhere. Anyway the war in Iraq was not about oil, they were trying to help the Iraqi people or it was somehow connected to 9/11, Just ask Bush, he might recall. Oh, that's right, the reason for the war was the claim that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Clearly everyone having Nuclear power doesn't contribute to suspicions that people have access to WMD. On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 2:02 AM, Mauro Lacy <[email protected]> wrote: > > About a month ago Mauro said that what had happened was thus far a proof > > of > > safety. > > You're right, but "thus far" was just after the first explosion, and based > on publicly available information. > I changed my mind just one or two days later, after the explosion in > number 3, and particularly, the internal explosion at the number 2 > reactor. > > > Now that they admit there was a full meltdown in the reactor, do you now > > still think that Nuclear power is safe? (or will every meltdown be the > > exception?) > > I still think that the risks of nuclear energy are preferable to the risks > and consequences of other forms of energy. Like, by example, when > countries are invaded and millions of people killed because of their oil > reserves. > >
