Jack

"If U were smarter, I'd have nothing 2 do"

Bonus Question: Do you think Big Oil wants to see nuclear power powering electric vehicles???? Are you kidding me??? On the power list (2) Big Oil is rules (3) GE (nuclear etc.), both squish the itty bitty (1,000,xxx,xxx) Sierra Club and (8,234,890,xxx,xxx,xxx) Greenpeace. NIMBYs are number 1.

Federal Government is somewhere between (2) and (900). Thats the ugly bottom line of politics and positive solutions in 2008.

Consumers are the ones causing the actual problems...but they seem happy to pay for energy at any cost rather than wholesale change.

No, we elect leaders the deal with these issues....and they haven't done a fucking thing....and the left blocks every other solution that isn't wind or solar, two very immature technologies.

Jack

"If U were smarter, I'd have nothing 2 do"

Shiiiit, I can't remember the last time that "the left " actually BLOCKED anything on a national level.

"the left blocks"....that's a laugh.

Be the change
you wish to see

That is how.

Demand is "us"...nobody else.

Personality traits inform others.

Jimmy Carter set up the Department of Energy. How that Dept helped or hurt our energy resource management?

Actually Jim, I said:
"The Democrats ARE to blame for the mismanagement of our energy resources.
...and so are the Republicans. Anyone who thinks EITHER PARTY can escape responsibility is either naive or blinded by partisan denial."

The Dems and Republicans are allowing big oil to block the construction of nuclear plants. And then they conveniently get to blame it on environmentalists. If you think big oil ISN'T behind the anti-nuclear efforts in America, then I gotta bridge to sell ya, bud.

Ultimately, ALL of our RESISTANCE to solving America's energy problems are sourced in PROTECTIONIST policies for the RICHEST special interests in Washington.

Until today, Americans have -never- considered the cost of the energy required to DO SOMETHING, in their math.

Thats why 'we' got ourselves here. Ya..the Gov refused to look forward..but, we spent and used ourselves to this point.

Personality traits inform others.

You misquoted me. I said:
"The Democrats ARE to blame for the mismanagement of our energy resources.
...and so are the Republicans. Anyone who thinks EITHER PARTY can escape responsibility is either naive or blinded by partisan denial."

I'm a consumer. And I'd LOVE IT if my state provided my electrical power from nuclear. But PG&E & ConEd aren't building any nuclear plants.

With the stroke of a pen, Kennedy launched a program that put a man on the moon. The government needs to do the same thing with nuclear. We have plenty of nuclear fuel that WE CONTROL. Enough to power America for a long time. Nuclear could solve a SIGNIFICANT portion of our electrical power needs. Then electric cars would actually run on electricity sourced from atomic energy rather than coal fired or natural gas fired electrical plants.

Hmmm. A clean fuel that doesn't provide profit to the Middle East? Go figure. Terrorism solved.

Back in Kennedy's day, "what if" was a message of hope. Anymore its a message of fear.

Ive long wanted to write a long long blog about the loss of "what if" as a positive message of change.

If today was 1960, the moon would be too dangerous, and "what if" there are strange viruses..we wouldnt go. We'd be scared shitless to even try.

What if?

Personality traits inform others.

...and so are the Republicans.

Anyone who thinks EITHER PARTY can escape responsibility is either naive or blinded by partisan denial.
>

Duh!

>* America - as a technology LEADER - should have hundreds of the MOST MODERN nuclear plants the world has ever seen. HUNDREDS. And building more.
>

That is the most misguided use of technology and water too, for that matter.

Why?

Indirectly they could run on nuclear energy. Electric cars running on nuclear-sourced electricity would be a nice clean-air solution that did not fund terrorism.

Why do you and so many others insist on putting your energy eggs in one basket?

The lion's share of a sound energy policy should include all renewable sources, instead of the big four, nuclear, oil, coal and natural gas. We've spent enough on nuclear technology with the same unanswered radioactive waste and safety questions today as in the 1970's.

I'm not insisting on putting my eggs in one basket. I'm suggesting a PROVEN solution that could SIGNIFICANTLY reduce our reliance on OIL. A PROVEN solution.

Over time we could run a majority of cars on nuclear-sourced electricity and have cleaner air.

Whether you like it or not, oil is going to become a MAJOR national security issue in the next 20 years, and we need to start NOW to drastically reduce our consumption of it.

Nuclear is PROVEN, so we can ramp it up now, and we can still bring a mix of solar, wind, etc online too.

In an even shorter time we could run a majory of cars on coal
sourced electricity - which is where most of our elctricity already
comes from now.

Nuclear and oil are largey unrelated issues.

When Detroit rolls out those nuclear powered cars I got dibs on a
car date with Judy Jetson.