• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama Said to Seek $54 Billion in Nuclear-Power Loans

Thumbs the **** up on this one. Great news.
 
Those are called breeder reactors. They can use the waste as recycled material for fission once the reaction is started. They do produce relatively low amounts of "waste". The real problem is the end result of a breeder reactor is weapons grade plutonium.

I hear there is a hell of a world market for that element. :mrgreen:

The US Navy has been operating nuclear reactors safely for 50 years. lots of them. The only real draw back is the waste, and you hit it right on the head.... old salt mines. They are geologically inactive for million year time periods, the perfect place to put the stuff.

Didn't we start a facility like that at Yucca Mountain?.... and Barry shut it down?

The draft budget removes funding for the planned nuclear-waste storage facility in Nevada, which has been 20 years and more than $9 billion in the making. A Department of Energy spokeswoman told Bloomberg that President Obama and Energy Secretary Steven Chu “have been emphatic that nuclear waste storage at Yucca Mountain is not an option, period.”

Nuclear Waste: Yucca Mountain’s Scrapped, So What Now? - Environmental Capital - WSJ

Yup, he sure did.
 
Yucca Mountain was a rip off from the beginning. The biggest pork scam ever.

In an appearance before the State Senate Finance Committee late last month, Attorney General Brian Sandoval predicted that the toxic waste dump will never open. Sandoval accurately described the Yucca Mountain site 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas as "a volcano that sits on an earthquake fault above an aquifer, next to the Nevada Test Site, next to one of the nation's largest organic farms, next to the state's largest dairy, adjacent to ... (America's) fastest-growing metropolitan area (and) next to one of the busiest Air Force bases in the country."

"If you could choose a worse place to store nuclear waste, I really challenge you to do so," he added.
 
Last edited:
The US Navy has been operating nuclear reactors safely for 50 years. lots of them. The only real draw back is the waste, and you hit it right on the head.... old salt mines. They are geologically inactive for million year time periods, the perfect place to put the stuff.

In addition to the geographic stability, because it's a salt mine there is a very low humidity level which decreases decay of the containers. One problem with long term storage of nuclear waste is that some of the byproducts (depending on what form of reactor is used) have half lives which will make the waste rather radioactive for periods of time which are longer than any language thus far has proven stable.
 
This is a great idea.

Nuclear isn't perfect but it's the cleanest solution for now. Obama is right... we need these energy surpluses in order to look at other avenues. Civilization needs energy to progress; not enough energy, no progression. We can talk about green technology until the cows come home but in the mean time there is the prospect of energy shortages in the future. Nuclear is the most efficient means.

As far as I know, reactor safety and waste material have improved a lot since Chernobyl. We've learned from the accidents and made super redundant systems. There is always going to be risk but this is one step closer to less depedence on foreign oligopolies to supply energy.

P.S. I love it when conservatives make a good thread we can all agree on. Kudos Rev.
 
Environmetalist will fight this and them cutting money to the dems could change Obama.
 
Environmetalist will fight this and them cutting money to the dems could change Obama.

Anything can change Obama....... the slightest breeze can change his direction.

But if it does..... it will be just one more failure in a long line of failure in this administration.
 
Environmetalist will fight this and them cutting money to the dems could change Obama.

I don't think they'll fight it that much. Sure, some will be opposed...but a lot of environmentalists have actually come around to supporting nuclear power.
 
What needs to be done is make the environmentalists that file law suits to stop the construction of these plants pay damages if the suits fail... that's what killed the nuclear industry last time.

Good job Barry, he finally is trying to do something right.
Nuclear obstructionists are placed in Gitmo for ten years with their mouth taped, while we built 100 new nuke plants.
 
I don't think they'll fight it that much. Sure, some will be opposed...but a lot of environmentalists have actually come around to supporting nuclear power.

I think they already are showing themselves


Obama's call for nuclear power plants angers supporters - Green House - USATODAY.com

President Obama's call Wednesday, in his State of the Union Address, for a "new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants" was panned by some environmentalists and Democratic backers.

Move.org, a progressive advocacy group, asked 10,000 members to rate how they felt -- from awful to great -- during President Obama's State of the Union address Wednesday. They more most upset when he called for new nuclear power plants and offshore oil drilling.

It was considered the worst part of his 71-minute speech by 10,000 members of MoveOn, a non-profit progressive advoacy group that has raised millions of dollars for Democratic political candidates. They had signed up to evaluate the speech live and every few seconds would hit a button to reflect how they felt about it, ranging from "awful" to "great."

"The most definitive drop in enthusiasm is when President Obama talked about nuclear power and offshore drilling," says Ilyse Hogue, MoveOn's director of political advocacy. "They're looking for clean energy sources that prioritize wind and solar."

Greenpeace, an environmental group, was also disappointed.
 
I think they already are showing themselves


Obama's call for nuclear power plants angers supporters - Green House - USATODAY.com

President Obama's call Wednesday, in his State of the Union Address, for a "new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants" was panned by some environmentalists and Democratic backers.

Move.org, a progressive advocacy group, asked 10,000 members to rate how they felt -- from awful to great -- during President Obama's State of the Union address Wednesday. They more most upset when he called for new nuclear power plants and offshore oil drilling.

It was considered the worst part of his 71-minute speech by 10,000 members of MoveOn, a non-profit progressive advoacy group that has raised millions of dollars for Democratic political candidates. They had signed up to evaluate the speech live and every few seconds would hit a button to reflect how they felt about it, ranging from "awful" to "great."

"The most definitive drop in enthusiasm is when President Obama talked about nuclear power and offshore drilling," says Ilyse Hogue, MoveOn's director of political advocacy. "They're looking for clean energy sources that prioritize wind and solar."

Greenpeace, an environmental group, was also disappointed.
I say we gather all 10,000 of them together and give them a choice. They can either support more nuke plants, or they can sit in sweatshops riding bicycle powered generators. Very simple. :2razz:
 
I say we gather all 10,000 of them together and give them a choice. They can either support more nuke plants, or they can sit in sweatshops riding bicycle powered generators. Very simple. :2razz:

And live in a cave, without any benefits of our modern society for the 4 hours a day they aren't peddling those bikes.. works for me. :mrgreen:
 
And live in a cave, without any benefits of our modern society for the 4 hours a day they aren't peddling those bikes.. works for me. :mrgreen:
Nah, they get UHC from American doctors that support it.
 
Whenever the Good Reverend posts, it's always Top Notch and "High Level", as you were. :thumbs:

I think most people would disagree. Saying we should dump nuclear waste on a major city because you don't agree with their political views just leads to trolling, and doesn't really help lead to intelligent discussion, no matter whether its being dumped on San Francisco or Orange County.
 
I'd much rather it invest in loans for nuclear power, than green cars and cap and trade. fact is most all of our power companies are government sanctioned monopolies.

It's the dawn of a new era of bipartisan -- Americans working together to make things better in America.

Green cars aren't that bad, Rev. Save money on gas, spend it on your kids.

FYI -- last years breakthroughs on cold fusion -- they're now calling it low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR), I predict are going to change the world. One battery powers your home -- for life. One battery powers your laptop -- for life. Pretty incredible stuff, IMO.

On the nuclear power plants -- I'm anticipating a blowback those who stand to lose money as more plants go up. Hopefully, pragmatic heads on both sides will prevail.
 
I think most people would disagree. Saying we should dump nuclear waste on a major city because you don't agree with their political views just leads to trolling, and doesn't really help lead to intelligent discussion, no matter whether its being dumped on San Francisco or Orange County.





Or you could know the greatness by now given 31K+ of near perfect posts, that he was teasing.... Take the stick out of your butt and lighten up.



Just so you know. I am not for dumping nuclear waste on San Fransisco..... I hope this clears things up for you... :lamo
 
It's the dawn of a new era of bipartisan -- Americans working together to make things better in America.

Green cars aren't that bad, Rev. Save money on gas, spend it on your kids.

FYI -- last years breakthroughs on cold fusion -- they're now calling it low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR), I predict are going to change the world. One battery powers your home -- for life. One battery powers your laptop -- for life. Pretty incredible stuff, IMO.

On the nuclear power plants -- I'm anticipating a blowback those who stand to lose money as more plants go up. Hopefully, pragmatic heads on both sides will prevail.




One idea is not "new era".... and green cars are bad for the environment...


Tell me about batteries and how we have to dispose them,.
 
A setback for the anti-nukers is long long overdue. This country needs the power plants and an upgraded energy grid.
 
.

FYI -- last years breakthroughs on cold fusion -- they're now calling it low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR)

Any links to that?.... it's one of my many interests.

(this wouldn't be DR. Buzzard's work would it?)
 
Last edited:
One idea is not "new era".... and green cars are bad for the environment...


Tell me about batteries and how we have to dispose them,.

It's not an idea -- it's a new version of cold fusion they're having some success with. There was a story on 60 minutes a while back.

The point about these batteries is they don't run out of power. Meaning every electronic item will come with it's own unlimited energy supply.
 
Any links to that?.... it's one of my many interests.

(this wouldn't be DR. Buzzard's work would it?)

Google LENR -- low energy nuclear reaction.

There was a story on 60 minutes a while back.
 
So we're going to use another depletable energy source that we mostly import, but this time the by product is extremely toxic? Great. :roll:

Mining for uranium is quite pretty too btw considering it's very volume intensive.

Did anyone know the U.S. imports 92 percent of our uranium? Kind of reminds me of oil.
:doh

one of the biggest misconceptions about nuclear power at the moment is this: It will end our energy dependence foreigners. The truth is it will not. That's the dirty little secret most people don't know about nuclear power in the United States these days.

Trends I'm Watching: U.S. Imports 92% of Uranium for Nuclear Power
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom