This post contains additional media. Click here to view the full post.

And suppose we just forget about what to do with the nuclear waste from the reactors, lethal to all life for more than 10,000 years. Even if we can contain the nuclear waste (a big “if” for many of us to swallow in these days of unforeseen financial market meltdowns), why pass this waste on to future generations, on to our great, great, great grandchildren?

That we’ve been unable to agree politically on a safe place to store nuclear waste (in Yucca Mountain, Nevada) masks the fact that we still need to move this toxic waste from as many as 104 currently operating nuclear reactors scattered throughout the continental U.S. Nice targets for those terrorists we’ve been unable to locate or perhaps for the swelling homegrown terrorist types as of late, folks who have come on hard times and can think of better things to do with a $700 billion bailout package and don’t like the way things are headed in Washington D.C. By the way, these nuclear reactors with a 40 year lifespan aren’t cheap, therefore they’ve been partially subsidized by American taxpayers for years.

What Senator McCain and Senator Obama seem to leave out in all their debates and public discourse is that America is no more energy independent with nuclear power than it is with oil. A key rationale for expanding nuclear power generation touted by those concerned about climate change – including both Presidential candidates: Nuclear power plants generate energy by splitting uranium atoms, resulting in no carbon dioxide emissions, standing in stark contrast to those CO2 emissions created by burning coal or oil. But the U.S., as it turns out, has even less uranium than oil as a percentage of domestic production.

Read more of this story »

After Palin told Myers she had decided against doing the original sketch they had worked out because of its impact on the campaign (obviously a nod to her remarks at the debate when she said she wouldn’t answer all of the questions the way they wanted her to), Amy Poehler “filled in” for Palin with a rather impressive satirical rap, occasionally reminiscent of Cypress Hill’s Insane in the Membrane, as Palin and Myers bopped along in approval. Among the enviro-themed lyrics were allusions to moose hunting and, of course, oil drilling; “When I see oil it’s drill, baby, drill-a,” sang the enthusiastic Poehler. Watch it below:

Read more of this story »

1) Renewables and Alternative Fuels–It is a distraction from the dire need to promote renewables and move to a clean, energy independent future.
2) Short Term Solution–We live in a country that has 4.5% of the world’s population and uses 25% of the world’s oil. Any oil found would simply be a short term solution. The time and money spent searching and drilling would be better spent promoting renewable energy and alternative fuels.
3) Price at the Pump–We wouldn’t save at the pump for about a decade, and even then the savings would be only a few cents.
4) Marine Life–Drilling offshore would negatively impact delicate marine ecosystems. Plus, the US government recently calculated there was a 33-51% chance of a major spill in the lifetime of an offshore oil and gas lease in the Chukchi Sea off Alaska. Thems not good odds!
5) Climate Change–As Jerry James Stone said in a comment in his recent Red Green and Blue article “the offshore solution does not address our climate crisis. We would still be burning the same amount of fossil fuel, and that is BAD!”

Read more of this story »

>>More coverage of the Republican National Convention at RG&B

“So, do you want to put your country first?,” asked former Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael Steele. “Then let’s reduce our dependency on foreign sources of oil and promote oil and gas production at home. In other words: Drill, baby, drill! And drill now!,” he said. Steele is one of the Republican Party’s few prominent African-American politicians in a year where a very low 1.5% of Republican Party delegates are African American.

Read more of this story »