<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
  xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
  xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
  >

<channel>
  <title>Green Options &#187; nuclear power plants</title>
  <link>http://greenoptions.com/tag/nuclear-power-plants</link>
  <description>Posts tagged 'nuclear power plants'</description>
  <pubDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2009 23:16:37 +0000</pubDate>
  <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
  <language>en</language>
  <item>
    <title>A Nuclear Blueprint to Cheap, Clean Energy</title>
    <link>http://planetsave.com/blog/2009/07/13/a-nuclear-blueprint-to-cheap-clean-energy/</link>
    <comments>http://planetsave.com/blog/2009/07/13/a-nuclear-blueprint-to-cheap-clean-energy/#comments</comments>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2009 23:16:37 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Ruedigar Matthes</dc:creator>
    
		<category><![CDATA[Energy &amp; Fuel]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Legislation]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>

    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://planetsave.com/blog/2009/07/13/a-nuclear-blueprint-to-cheap-clean-energy/</guid>
    <description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://planetsave.com/files/2009/07/alexander.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-4669" src="http://go635254.s3.amazonaws.com/planetsave/files/2009/07/alexander.jpg" alt="" width="500" height="303" /></a></p>
<p><strong>With the historic passage of climate legislation through the House of Representatives, many concerns have trickled forth. Does the climate legislation do enough? Will it even work? Does it have the right aim? With the issuance of similar concerns have come proposed solutions and substitutions. The republicans have proposed that 100 nuclear power plants be built by 2030 in place of the proposed cap-and-trade climate bill. I&#8217;ve recently written two articles on <a href="http://redgreenandblue.org/2009/07/08/is-nuclear-the-best-solution-on-climate-change/" target="_blank">the Republican &#8220;solution&#8221;</a></strong><strong> to both the climate and economic crises. And today I&#8217;m writing more.</strong></p>
<p>Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) announced his own personal blueprint for the nation&#8217;s recovery. He began by re-stating the Senate Republicans&#8217; plan that would replace the cap-and-trade legislation passed by the House, which includes <a href="http://planetsave.com/blog/2009/06/25/republicans-call-for-100-new-nuclear-plants/" target="_blank">building 100 nuclear power plants within 20 years</a>, the encouragement of <a href="http://gas2.org/2008/04/23/affordable-electric-cars-coming-to-us-in-2009/">electric cars</a> for conservation, offshore exploration for natural gas and oil and<span> </span>doubling energy research and development to make renewable energy cost-competitive.</p>
<p><a href="http://planetsave.com/blog/2009/07/13/a-nuclear-blueprint-to-cheap-clean-energy/" class="more-link">Read more of this story &#187;</a></p>
]]></description>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://planetsave.com/blog/2009/07/13/a-nuclear-blueprint-to-cheap-clean-energy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>Republicans Call For 100 New Nuclear Plants</title>
    <link>http://planetsave.com/blog/2009/06/25/republicans-call-for-100-new-nuclear-plants/</link>
    <comments>http://planetsave.com/blog/2009/06/25/republicans-call-for-100-new-nuclear-plants/#comments</comments>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2009 21:27:41 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Ruedigar Matthes</dc:creator>
    
		<category><![CDATA[Energy &amp; Fuel]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Environmental Policies]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>

    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://planetsave.com/blog/2009/06/25/republicans-call-for-100-new-nuclear-plants/</guid>
    <description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://planetsave.com/files/2009/06/nuclear.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-4576" src="http://go635254.s3.amazonaws.com/planetsave/files/2009/06/nuclear.jpg" alt="" width="500" height="375" /></a><strong></strong></p>

<p><strong>“We all remember this time last year,&#8221; said Senator Roger Wicker, R-Miss., at a hearing on Capitol Hill on Monday. &#8220;We were in the midst of an energy crisis, paying $4 for a gallon of gasoline, and Americans were seeing their utility bills skyrocketing.&#8221; Since then, he went on to say, the energy problems haven&#8217;t disappeared and no changes in policy have been made. He warned that, though the prices have gone down, if we do not make any changes, we will fall into the same hole in which we found ourselves last summer.</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/01/09/is-nuclear-power-the-answer-to-climate-change/" target="_blank">His solution? Nuclear.</a> Stating that &#8220;the cornerstone of any real solution to the American energy problem needs to involve offshore resources and <a href="http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/01/15/devils-advocate-10-green-arguments-for-nuclear-power/" target="_blank">nuclear power</a>&#8230;which generates electricity without producing greenhouse gas emissions and has a minimal impact on the environment.&#8221;  The first step to escaping America&#8217;s current energy crisis according to Wicker is to build more nuclear power plants.</p>
<p><a href="http://planetsave.com/blog/2009/06/25/republicans-call-for-100-new-nuclear-plants/" class="more-link">Read more of this story &#187;</a></p>
]]></description>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://planetsave.com/blog/2009/06/25/republicans-call-for-100-new-nuclear-plants/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>Nuclear Power Plant&#8217;s Water Rights Threaten Endangered Species</title>
    <link>http://planetsave.com/blog/2009/06/05/nuclear-power-plants-water-rights-threaten-endangered-species/</link>
    <comments>http://planetsave.com/blog/2009/06/05/nuclear-power-plants-water-rights-threaten-endangered-species/#comments</comments>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2009 21:19:38 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Ruedigar Matthes</dc:creator>
    
		<category><![CDATA[Energy &amp; Fuel]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Nature &amp; Conservation]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Water]]></category>

    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://planetsave.com/blog/2009/06/05/nuclear-power-plants-water-rights-threaten-endangered-species/</guid>
    <description><![CDATA[<p><strong><a rel="attachment wp-att-4525" href="http://planetsave.com/blog/2009/06/05/nuclear-power-plants-water-rights-threaten-endangered-species/green-river/"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-4525" src="http://go635254.s3.amazonaws.com/planetsave/files/2009/06/green-river.jpg" alt="" width="500" height="280" /></a></strong></p>

<p><strong>In southeast Utah rests a peaceful town located on the banks of a peaceful river. Here the Green River flows between two canyons, Gray and Labyrinth, allowing for farming and ranching in an arid desert. Driving through Green River, Utah doesn&#8217;t take but a few moments, including a stop to purchase some mouth-watering melons, for which Green River is famous. But Green River now has a new claim to fame.</strong></p>
<p>Transition Power Development LLC (TPD) has proposed construction of a 2 unit nuclear power plant known as the Blue Castle Project situated just outside of the peaceful town. In order to maintain the 2 unit nuclear power plant, massive amounts of water would be required. The <a href="http://www.kcwcd.com/" target="_blank">Kane County Water Conservancy District</a> (KCWCD) has filed a <a href="http://uraniumwatch.org/transitionpower/kcwcd.89-74_changeapplication.090330.pdf" target="_blank">water-rights application</a> in order to facilitate the project. The application requests 29,600 acre-feet of water, which would be diverted from the Green River, a part of the Colorado River drainage.</p>
<p><a href="http://planetsave.com/blog/2009/06/05/nuclear-power-plants-water-rights-threaten-endangered-species/" class="more-link">Read more of this story &#187;</a></p>
]]></description>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://planetsave.com/blog/2009/06/05/nuclear-power-plants-water-rights-threaten-endangered-species/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>Beginning of the End For Yucca Mountain or the Beginning of Interim Nuclear Waste Management?</title>
    <link>http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/02/23/beginning-of-the-end-for-yucca-mountain-or-the-beginning-of-interim-nuclear-waste-management/</link>
    <comments>http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/02/23/beginning-of-the-end-for-yucca-mountain-or-the-beginning-of-interim-nuclear-waste-management/#comments</comments>
    <pubDate>Sat, 23 Feb 2008 16:41:53 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Max Lindberg</dc:creator>
    
		<category><![CDATA[Action &amp; Activism]]></category>

    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/02/23/beginning-of-the-end-for-yucca-mountain-or-the-beginning-of-interim-nuclear-waste-management/</guid>
    <description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://planetsave.com/files/2008/02/yucca-mountain2.gif" title="yucca-mountain2.gif"><img src="http://go635254.s3.amazonaws.com/planetsave/files/2008/02/yucca-mountain2.gif" alt="yucca-mountain2.gif" /></a>Nuclear energy officials appear to be taking the lead in the quest for storage of radioactive waste, as Nevada&#8217;s Yucca Mountain looks less and less like a reality, at least in the short term.</p>
<p>Marshall Cohen, an official of the <a href="http://www.nei.org/">Nuclear Energy Institute</a> told the <a href="http://www.lvrj.com/news/15901672.html">Las Vegas Review Journal</a>  that the industry is looking to several communities that might welcome interim storage of its used fuel.</p>
<p>Two or three communities, according to Cohen, are showing interest in the proposition, but he declined to name them pending further negotiations.  He did say, however, that some were among the 11 sites that once volunteered to host a government run nuclear waste reprocessing site.  Those states were Idaho, Illinois, Kentucky, New Mexico, Ohio, South Carolina and Washington..</p>
<p>The move is seen as a major shift from reliance on completion of the Yucca Mountain project that would send spent waste to reprocessing facilities.  Presently waste is stored on above-ground pads and in steel and concrete casks.   The Department of Energy has voiced its disapproval of such action, citing political, legal and technical challenges.</p>
<p>This wouldn&#8217;t rule out the anticipated completion of Yucca Mountain, but could answer the question of what to do with radioactive waste that&#8217;s piling up at nuclear facilities around the country.   Should the new Congress decided to halt the Nevada project, as has been threatened, industry officials believe their proposal will offer some relief to local reactor sites until a permanent repository is completed.</p>
<p>And now the blueprint:</p>
<p>&#8220;<a href="http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/01/15/devils-advocate-10-green-arguments-for-nuclear-power/" target="_blank">Nuclear power is the obvious first step to a policy of clean and low-cost energy</a>. One hundred new plants in 20 years would double U.S. nuclear production, making it about forty percent of all electricity production. Add 10% for sun and wind and other renewables, another 10% for hydroelectric, maybe 5% for natural gas—and we begin to have a cheap as well as clean energy policy.&#8221;</p>
<p>The second step is to transition into an electric vehicle nation, where half of the cars are electric. According to Brookings Institution scholars, this could be done without building more power plants because of the vast amounts of energy that goes unused at nights. That power, which is already produced, would be used as vehicles charged overnight.</p>
<p>The third step? &#8220;Explore offshore for natural gas (it’s low carbon) and oil (using less, but using our own).&#8221;</p>
<p>And finally, put more money toward research - doubling funding. We need to work to create answers to meet energy challenges, which include: improving batteries for plug-in vehicles, making solar power cost competitive with fossil fuels, making carbon capture a reality for coal-burning plants, safely recycling used nuclear fuel, making advanced biofuels (crops we don’t eat) cost-competitive with gasoline, making more buildings green buildings and providing energy from fusion.</p>
<p>Here lies his blueprint. He exposed it to proponents and opponents alike. And he closed by stating that &#8220;our policy of cheap and clean energy based upon nuclear power, <a href="http://gas2.org/2008/04/23/affordable-electric-cars-coming-to-us-in-2009/">electric cars</a>, off-shore exploration and doubling energy R&#38;D will help family budgets and create jobs. It will also prove to be the fastest way to increase American energy independence, clean the air and reduce global warming.&#8221;</p>
<p>He welcomes comments at <a href="http://alexander.senate.gov/" target="_blank">www.alexander.senate.gov</a>.</p>
<p>For a full text of his speech, <a href="http://alexander.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Speeches.Detail&#38;Speech_Id=c3830ec3-70e4-42cc-9176-d74f1bc986db" target="_blank">click here</a>.</p>
<p>Photo Credit: <a href="http://alexander.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Images.Detail&#38;Image_id=1ee1f0e1-0aba-48be-9920-f694954577f5&#38;ImageGallery_id=268273d8-103f-4671-bda5-48557e45940a" target="_blank">www.alexander.senate.gov</a></p>
]]></description>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/02/23/beginning-of-the-end-for-yucca-mountain-or-the-beginning-of-interim-nuclear-waste-management/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>Water Shortage Could Dry Up Nuclear Power Plants in Southeast</title>
    <link>http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/01/23/water-shortage-could-dry-up-nuclear-power-plants-in-southeast/</link>
    <comments>http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/01/23/water-shortage-could-dry-up-nuclear-power-plants-in-southeast/#comments</comments>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2008 23:51:30 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Max Lindberg</dc:creator>
    
		<category><![CDATA[Environmental &amp; Climate Science]]></category>

    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/01/23/water-shortage-could-dry-up-nuclear-power-plants-in-southeast/</guid>
    <description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://planetsave.com/files/2008/01/nuclear-power-plant.jpg" title="nuclear-power-plant.jpg"><img src="http://go635254.s3.amazonaws.com/planetsave/files/2008/01/nuclear-power-plant.jpg" alt="nuclear-power-plant.jpg" /></a>We&#8217;ve all read about the drought in America&#8217;s Southeast, and if it doesn&#8217;t let up very quickly, some nuclear power stations may have to either cut back operations or shut down temporarily because of a lack of water.</p>
<p>An Alabama reactor had  to shutdown for a brief period in the summer, and officials in the Southeast now say it is becoming a crisis.
<p><a href="http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/01/23/water-shortage-could-dry-up-nuclear-power-plants-in-southeast/" class="more-link">Read more of this story &#187;</a></p>
]]></description>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/01/23/water-shortage-could-dry-up-nuclear-power-plants-in-southeast/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>Tell it to the Fudge</title>
    <link>http://ecoscraps.com/2008/01/16/tell-it-to-the-fudge/</link>
    <comments>http://ecoscraps.com/2008/01/16/tell-it-to-the-fudge/#comments</comments>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:10:59 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Shirley Siluk Gregory</dc:creator>
    
		<category><![CDATA[ecoscraps]]></category>

    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://ecoscraps.com/2008/01/16/tell-it-to-the-fudge/</guid>
    <description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://ecoscraps.com/2008/01/16/tell-it-to-the-fudge/a-plate-of-chocolate-brownies/" rel="attachment wp-att-145" title="A plate of chocolate brownies."><img src="http://go635254.s3.amazonaws.com/ecoscraps/files/2008/01/brownies.jpg" alt="A plate of chocolate brownies." height="376" width="501" /></a></p>
<p>The Nuclear Regulatory Commission reports that a nuclear plant worker in Vermont was suspended after <a href="http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080115/NEWS04/801150333">testing positive for drugs;</a> the worker blamed the test results on brownies served at a party that he didn&#8217;t know were laced with marijuana.</p>
<p><em><a href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Chocolate_brownies_without_table.jpg">Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons</a></em></p>
<p>And now the blueprint:</p>
<p>&#8220;<a href="http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/01/15/devils-advocate-10-green-arguments-for-nuclear-power/" target="_blank">Nuclear power is the obvious first step to a policy of clean and low-cost energy</a>. One hundred new plants in 20 years would double U.S. nuclear production, making it about forty percent of all electricity production. Add 10% for sun and wind and other renewables, another 10% for hydroelectric, maybe 5% for natural gas—and we begin to have a cheap as well as clean energy policy.&#8221;</p>
<p>The second step is to transition into an electric vehicle nation, where half of the cars are electric. According to Brookings Institution scholars, this could be done without building more power plants because of the vast amounts of energy that goes unused at nights. That power, which is already produced, would be used as vehicles charged overnight.</p>
<p>The third step? &#8220;Explore offshore for natural gas (it’s low carbon) and oil (using less, but using our own).&#8221;</p>
<p>And finally, put more money toward research - doubling funding. We need to work to create answers to meet energy challenges, which include: improving batteries for plug-in vehicles, making solar power cost competitive with fossil fuels, making carbon capture a reality for coal-burning plants, safely recycling used nuclear fuel, making advanced biofuels (crops we don’t eat) cost-competitive with gasoline, making more buildings green buildings and providing energy from fusion.</p>
<p>Here lies his blueprint. He exposed it to proponents and opponents alike. And he closed by stating that &#8220;our policy of cheap and clean energy based upon nuclear power, <a href="http://gas2.org/2008/04/23/affordable-electric-cars-coming-to-us-in-2009/">electric cars</a>, off-shore exploration and doubling energy R&#38;D will help family budgets and create jobs. It will also prove to be the fastest way to increase American energy independence, clean the air and reduce global warming.&#8221;</p>
<p>He welcomes comments at <a href="http://alexander.senate.gov/" target="_blank">www.alexander.senate.gov</a>.</p>
<p>For a full text of his speech, <a href="http://alexander.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Speeches.Detail&#38;Speech_Id=c3830ec3-70e4-42cc-9176-d74f1bc986db" target="_blank">click here</a>.</p>
<p>Photo Credit: <a href="http://alexander.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Images.Detail&#38;Image_id=1ee1f0e1-0aba-48be-9920-f694954577f5&#38;ImageGallery_id=268273d8-103f-4671-bda5-48557e45940a" target="_blank">www.alexander.senate.gov</a></p>
]]></description>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://ecoscraps.com/2008/01/16/tell-it-to-the-fudge/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>Former Scientific Advisor says Green Campaigners are Luddites</title>
    <link>http://ecoworldly.com/2008/01/13/former-scientific-advisor-says-green-campaigners-are-luddites/</link>
    <comments>http://ecoworldly.com/2008/01/13/former-scientific-advisor-says-green-campaigners-are-luddites/#comments</comments>
    <pubDate>Sun, 13 Jan 2008 23:03:08 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Pem Charnley</dc:creator>
    
		<category><![CDATA[In Europe]]></category>

    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://ecoworldly.com/2008/01/13/former-scientific-advisor-says-green-campaigners-are-luddites/</guid>
    <description><![CDATA[<p align="left"><a title="thinkgreen1.jpg" href="http://ecoworldly.com/files/2008/01/thinkgreen1.jpg"><img src="http://go635254.s3.amazonaws.com/ecoworldly/files/2008/01/thinkgreen1.jpg" alt="thinkgreen1.jpg" align="left" /></a>The former scientific advisor to Tony Blair - the man who urged our then prime minister to take global warming seriously, has come out and stated that he feels many green campaigners are actually a liability.</p>
<p>Sir David King has been quoted as saying: &#8220;There is a suspicion, and I have that suspicion myself, that a large number of people who label themselves &#8216;green&#8217; are actually keen to take us back to the 18th or even the 17th century.</p>
<p><a href="http://ecoworldly.com/2008/01/13/former-scientific-advisor-says-green-campaigners-are-luddites/" class="more-link">Read more of this story &#187;</a></p>
]]></description>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://ecoworldly.com/2008/01/13/former-scientific-advisor-says-green-campaigners-are-luddites/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>Unbelievable UK Nuclear Decision</title>
    <link>http://ecoworldly.com/2008/01/10/unbelievable-uk-nuclear-decision/</link>
    <comments>http://ecoworldly.com/2008/01/10/unbelievable-uk-nuclear-decision/#comments</comments>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2008 18:57:34 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Pem Charnley</dc:creator>
    
		<category><![CDATA[In Europe]]></category>

    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://ecoworldly.com/2008/01/10/unbelievable-uk-nuclear-decision/</guid>
    <description><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://go635254.s3.amazonaws.com/ecoworldly/files/2008/01/reactors.jpg" alt="reactors.jpg" align="left" />It doesn&#8217;t matter which UK news source you choose. It&#8217;s a story that overshadows all others today.</p>
<p>Britain has decided to return to nuclear power in a big way. No matter that one of our former environment ministers was interviewed earlier and stated categorically what an absolutely ill-advised decsision this is. Gordon Brown&#8217;s government have today made the nuclear decision official.</p>
<p>One of the arguments for this decision is that the government states that it will help them tackle CO2 emissions.</p>
<p>Yet, according to experts, the reduction in emissions will be a hideously pathetic &#8230; 4%. That&#8217;s no argument for nuclear.
<p><a href="http://ecoworldly.com/2008/01/10/unbelievable-uk-nuclear-decision/" class="more-link">Read more of this story &#187;</a></p>
]]></description>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://ecoworldly.com/2008/01/10/unbelievable-uk-nuclear-decision/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>Video of Sleeping Nuclear Station Guards</title>
    <link>http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/01/04/video-of-sleeping-nuclear-station-guards/</link>
    <comments>http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/01/04/video-of-sleeping-nuclear-station-guards/#comments</comments>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Jan 2008 16:18:18 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Max Lindberg</dc:creator>
    
		<category><![CDATA[Other Green Topics]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Video &amp; Media]]></category>

    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/01/04/video-of-sleeping-nuclear-station-guards/</guid>
    <description><![CDATA[<p>What more can one say?  CBS shocked the industry with this video of guards sleeping at the Peach Bottom nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania.  They just happen to be in what they called &#8220;the ready room.&#8221;</p>
<p><code>This story contains additional media. <a href="http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/01/04/video-of-sleeping-nuclear-station-guards/">Click here to view the media</a>.</code></p>
<p>The full story in the <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/03/AR2008010304442.html">Washington Post</a>.</p>
<p>And now the blueprint:</p>
<p>&#8220;<a href="http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/01/15/devils-advocate-10-green-arguments-for-nuclear-power/" target="_blank">Nuclear power is the obvious first step to a policy of clean and low-cost energy</a>. One hundred new plants in 20 years would double U.S. nuclear production, making it about forty percent of all electricity production. Add 10% for sun and wind and other renewables, another 10% for hydroelectric, maybe 5% for natural gas—and we begin to have a cheap as well as clean energy policy.&#8221;</p>
<p>The second step is to transition into an electric vehicle nation, where half of the cars are electric. According to Brookings Institution scholars, this could be done without building more power plants because of the vast amounts of energy that goes unused at nights. That power, which is already produced, would be used as vehicles charged overnight.</p>
<p>The third step? &#8220;Explore offshore for natural gas (it’s low carbon) and oil (using less, but using our own).&#8221;</p>
<p>And finally, put more money toward research - doubling funding. We need to work to create answers to meet energy challenges, which include: improving batteries for plug-in vehicles, making solar power cost competitive with fossil fuels, making carbon capture a reality for coal-burning plants, safely recycling used nuclear fuel, making advanced biofuels (crops we don’t eat) cost-competitive with gasoline, making more buildings green buildings and providing energy from fusion.</p>
<p>Here lies his blueprint. He exposed it to proponents and opponents alike. And he closed by stating that &#8220;our policy of cheap and clean energy based upon nuclear power, <a href="http://gas2.org/2008/04/23/affordable-electric-cars-coming-to-us-in-2009/">electric cars</a>, off-shore exploration and doubling energy R&#38;D will help family budgets and create jobs. It will also prove to be the fastest way to increase American energy independence, clean the air and reduce global warming.&#8221;</p>
<p>He welcomes comments at <a href="http://alexander.senate.gov/" target="_blank">www.alexander.senate.gov</a>.</p>
<p>For a full text of his speech, <a href="http://alexander.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Speeches.Detail&#38;Speech_Id=c3830ec3-70e4-42cc-9176-d74f1bc986db" target="_blank">click here</a>.</p>
<p>Photo Credit: <a href="http://alexander.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Images.Detail&#38;Image_id=1ee1f0e1-0aba-48be-9920-f694954577f5&#38;ImageGallery_id=268273d8-103f-4671-bda5-48557e45940a" target="_blank">www.alexander.senate.gov</a></p>
]]></description>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/01/04/video-of-sleeping-nuclear-station-guards/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>Nuclear Power is Green!  Renewable Energy Wrecks the Environment!</title>
    <link>http://maxlindberg.greenoptions.com/2007/07/26/nuclear-power-is-green-renewable-energy-wrecks-the-environment/</link>
    <comments>http://maxlindberg.greenoptions.com/2007/07/26/nuclear-power-is-green-renewable-energy-wrecks-the-environment/#comments</comments>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jul 2007 10:28:17 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Max Lindberg</dc:creator>
    
		<category><![CDATA[Energy]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Greening the Golden Years]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Nevada]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Yucca Mountain]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[food]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[green]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[green cities]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[green energy]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[greening]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[nuclear]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[nuclear energy]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[nuclear power]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[nuclear power plants]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[nuclear storage]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[radiation]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[renewable]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[renewable energy]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[storage]]></category>

    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://maxlindberg.greenoptions.com/2007/07/26/nuclear-power-is-green-renewable-energy-wrecks-the-environment/</guid>
    <description><![CDATA[<p>
Here&#8217;s another one who thinks nuclear power is the energy panacea we all need, and that renewable energy production is, as he states, &#34;a rape of nature.&#34;  Strong words and I just had to talk about it.  The story comes from <em><a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/07/070724160209.htm" title="Science Daily">Science Daily</a></em>, and there&#8217;s also a link to <a href="http://library.thinkquest.org/17940/texts/nuclear_waste_storage/nuclear_waste_storage.html" title="Nuclear Waste Storage">Nuclear Waste Storage</a> that pretty well explains the problem, and takes a good look at the controversial Yucca Mountain storage facility in Nevada.
</p>
<p><!--break--></p>
<p>And now the blueprint:</p>
<p>&#8220;<a href="http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/01/15/devils-advocate-10-green-arguments-for-nuclear-power/" target="_blank">Nuclear power is the obvious first step to a policy of clean and low-cost energy</a>. One hundred new plants in 20 years would double U.S. nuclear production, making it about forty percent of all electricity production. Add 10% for sun and wind and other renewables, another 10% for hydroelectric, maybe 5% for natural gas—and we begin to have a cheap as well as clean energy policy.&#8221;</p>
<p>The second step is to transition into an electric vehicle nation, where half of the cars are electric. According to Brookings Institution scholars, this could be done without building more power plants because of the vast amounts of energy that goes unused at nights. That power, which is already produced, would be used as vehicles charged overnight.</p>
<p>The third step? &#8220;Explore offshore for natural gas (it’s low carbon) and oil (using less, but using our own).&#8221;</p>
<p>And finally, put more money toward research - doubling funding. We need to work to create answers to meet energy challenges, which include: improving batteries for plug-in vehicles, making solar power cost competitive with fossil fuels, making carbon capture a reality for coal-burning plants, safely recycling used nuclear fuel, making advanced biofuels (crops we don’t eat) cost-competitive with gasoline, making more buildings green buildings and providing energy from fusion.</p>
<p>Here lies his blueprint. He exposed it to proponents and opponents alike. And he closed by stating that &#8220;our policy of cheap and clean energy based upon nuclear power, <a href="http://gas2.org/2008/04/23/affordable-electric-cars-coming-to-us-in-2009/">electric cars</a>, off-shore exploration and doubling energy R&#38;D will help family budgets and create jobs. It will also prove to be the fastest way to increase American energy independence, clean the air and reduce global warming.&#8221;</p>
<p>He welcomes comments at <a href="http://alexander.senate.gov/" target="_blank">www.alexander.senate.gov</a>.</p>
<p>For a full text of his speech, <a href="http://alexander.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Speeches.Detail&#38;Speech_Id=c3830ec3-70e4-42cc-9176-d74f1bc986db" target="_blank">click here</a>.</p>
<p>Photo Credit: <a href="http://alexander.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Images.Detail&#38;Image_id=1ee1f0e1-0aba-48be-9920-f694954577f5&#38;ImageGallery_id=268273d8-103f-4671-bda5-48557e45940a" target="_blank">www.alexander.senate.gov</a></p>
]]></description>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://maxlindberg.greenoptions.com/2007/07/26/nuclear-power-is-green-renewable-energy-wrecks-the-environment/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  </item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- 371 queries in 0.826 seconds. -->