Comments on: Anti-nuke rally downtown today

By: Dale

Dale — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 02:22:41 +0000

I thought that was the glow of a man in love

By: Thomas Wheatley

Thomas Wheatley — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 00:10:59 +0000

Like Andisheh, I too am highly radioactive, Dale. I glow. And sometimes befuddle those around me.

But I wanted to commend you on doing your part to conserve.

By: Dale

Dale — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 23:29:01 +0000

Wow, I should have read the entire linked article. I have no reason to doubt the numbers, but it seems incredible to me that the steam I routinely see is 40+ million gallons a day. I wonder if modern designs are more efficient. I know that some use recirculated and reclaimed water, rather than the once-through model. It would be interesting to see how the French and Japanese have addressed these problems.

In reading realted to the subject, I learned that many environmentalists and “social justice” advocates oppose the nukes becasue of the expense, after working as hard as possible to make them expensive.

I believe in conservation. I put that in practice with the appliances that I buy and my energy use. I am genuinely interested in viable alternatives, but have not seen any from the other side.

By: Andisheh Nouraee

Andisheh Nouraee — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 20:42:50 +0000

>>>Nuke plants take in HUGE amounts of water and they return the vast majority of it to the source. The loss is the steam rising fromthe cooling towers.

Scott Henry’s story linked above indicates roughly half of the water used at Vogtle ends up as steam.

I go back-and-forth about nuclear power. Perhaps the radiation has ruined my ability to make decisions.

By: Dale

Dale — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 16:41:51 +0000

Oil – NO
Coal – NO
Hydro dams – NO
Nuclear – NO

What then?

I wish I could be there to hear the alternatives suggested to supply a rapidly growing region with power. Wind, solar and conservation combined simply won’t get it done for over 5 million people.

I love the blurb on the linked website that there is “no safe level of radiation”. Apparently they are blissfully unaware of the massive amounts of radiation emitted by nature.

Nuke plants take in HUGE amounts of water and they return the vast majority of it to the source. The loss is the steam rising fromthe cooling towers.

Massive loss of life? These plants aren’t Chernobyl so stop the scare tactics. The US NAvy operates huge numbers of reactors (land based and ships) with no major incidents in over 40 years.

One day we may be able to run on something else, but for the reasonably foreseeable future, the choices are hydro, petro and nuke.