-> HI Wayne,   
   ->    
   -> On Tue 2039-Mar-29 15:51, WAYNE CHIRNSIDE (1:123/140) wrote to RICHARD   
   WEBB:   
   ->    
   ->    
   ->    
   ->  RW> And this surprises you how?   
   ->    
   ->  BK>  Saddens, not surprises.   
   ->    
   ->  RW> Doesn't do either for me, angers me.     
   ->    
   -> WC> Don't feel like you're The Lone Ranger.   
   ->    
   -> We don't want to teach kids science, but want them to listen to all this   
   -> creationist bs.  We don't teach civics, have   
   -> money for arts education and culture, but plenty of money   
   -> for them to go out and collide with each other and sustain   
   -> head injuries.  YEah right.   
   ->    
   ->  RW> but the big fascists who really have a lot to gain like a dumbed   
   ->  RW> down populace.   
   ->    
   -> WC> Yup.   
   -> WC> Ionizing radiation is now good for you!    
   -> WC> MSNBC part owned by G.E. really downplayed the very real threat   
   -> WC> there.    
      
   A recent comprehensive Stanford University study has revealed that current   
   alternate energy technology along with increases in efficiency and   
   conservation could lead the U.S. to cost competitive green energy in   
   between 20 - 40 years.   
      
   Assuming the political will to go in that direction were there.   
   Nuclear is quite simply the most expensive form of energy there   
   is and could not even be considered if the costs of the wastes and   
   liability were taken into consideration.   
      
   The insurance liability has been shifted to the taxpayer    
   in the form of the The Price-Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act.   
      
   That said I give grudging and limited support to LFTR or floride molten   
   salt reactors as they are inherently fail safe and simply turn off   
   if the outside power and safety systems go out.   
   If one overheats a frozen plug melts, the fuel drains out   
   and it turns itself off.   
      
   This design also essentially eats its own waste as well as  being    
   able to use other light water reactors waste for fuel.   
   Further in addition to far less volumes of waste the waste that is   
   generated   
   has no long lived radioactive waste with several valuable stable isotopes   
   recoverable in quite a limited time scale.   
      
   Still of concern is locating them in a geologically stable area   
   as well as an area safe from tsunami.    
      
   -> WE're gonna need nukes, like it or not to get through the   
   -> next few decades until we figure out the lower carbon   
   -> footprint thing.     
      
   I was of that opinion until quite recently and if it will prevent   
   foreign policy conflict overseas I'm for it.   
      
   However I firmly believe what is holding up even friendlier forms of   
   alternative energies are vested corporate interests intent upon squeezing   
   every last petrodollar out of the hands of the American people at the   
   expense in blood to our servicemen and service woman.   
   See the tagline.   
      
   -> The longer we put it off because the   
   -> fascists run the show the more we're gonna need those nukes   
   -> to bridge the gap.   
      
   The longer either is held off the more profitable for the fascists.   
   So that's what they'll do.   
   Costs or country be damned.   
      
   ->    
   ->  RW> Most of these pieces of human garbage would discount and   
   ->  RW> ridicule the scientists who put the toys they now enjoy in   
   ->  RW> their hands.  tHey have no clue whatsoever what gave them   
   ->  RW> their little satellite dish and their fifty-seven channels   
   ->  RW> of nothin' on.   
      
      
      
   ...Smedley Butler explained it to me.   
   --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5   
    * Origin: Since 1991 And Were Still Here! DOCSPLACE.TZO.COM (1:123/140)