The only green in nuclear power is money

No nukes.

We can't even guard the borders. LOL Think they can guard Nuclear power plants? lol They don't even keep track of people who have outstayed their visas either.

They do not yet have a safe way to render the waste non-toxic for centuries. Hey, the problems probably won't surface until 100 years and the people who made millions and billions off of it won't be around to face charges that they stored it incorrectly in defective cannisters or a bad site.

if you do the research there is nuclear energy technology that is safe and and cannot be turned into weapons and is the size of small portable potty box. the only obstacles are people who dont believe and also the problem about where to store depleted radio active material that has a decay too long which would cause a build up over time. but with more people embracing this idea, we can solve the problem of radioactive waste disposal.

Next they'll be telling us that coal is a clean source of energy...

Leave that toxic stuff alone - its meant to stay in the ground. We have the answers to our energy needs, its called wind and sun. We don't have the water resources to waste, and we don't know what to do with the waste...

Nuclear energy - another expression of the insanity of humanity!

It's green in that it only produces steam... and depleted nuclear waste. But that's what Nevada is for right?

Yeah nuclear power is really clean. If you look at any power technology, they all have downfalls to them. Wind power kills migrating birds. Solar power has tons of battery waste. Really the only good one truly is geothermal. Anyways I welcome global warming I live in England and the weather would be great.

When I was in Seattle Wa. they said a solar panel that would work in cloudy weather was discovered and then suddenly it went away. Where? The frigging oil companies paid millions for the patent.

Yes the turbines kill birds, but nuclear killes everything for centuries. So lets find something safe that all of us can use. And I saw these new kinds of turbines that are used in urban centers that are on apartment roofs that birds can not get into and that are safer and work better.
It was on the documentary channel.

StopNoise,
They are using depleted uranium from nuclear waste in bullets in Iraq and it is killing our own soldiers. I watched a C-Span hearing where Hillary Clinton addressed the effects upon our own troops.

We are, basically, exporting our nuclear waste via depleted uranium waste to other countries and killing, not only the people who use the bullets made of it, but centuries of people who have it in their air, dirt and water.

Real humanists or Christians can't buy this and believe that this is immoral.

Our pathetic soldiers are sent to Germany and Japan for specialist tests to confirm that their death walk is from depleted uranium weapons.

Its a real cover up but if you watched the hearings on C-Span when the blood lust started, you would have watched the hearings.

Search depleted Uranium weapons or just delpeted uranium.

We all have to be very careful with wind turbines on urban environments as it produces low and high infra-sounds that affects human health and quality of life. I have no problem using it on remote areas except for the birds but we sure can figure out a way to keep them from harming themselves.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Usg7-xbQOcM&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Usg7-xbQOcM&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Usg7-xbQOcM

sorry... this is a really good clip though

Right, Anyone can bla, bla anything about but if you do not show me what you going to do with the waste of nuclear power plants, not a pejorative demoralizing propaganda by two professionals like Penn and W but real and clean facts. Give me the facts of Nuclear waste, Come on, Open up!

Here it is the real truth why I am not for Nuclear Power Plants. First, it still a monopolized form of distribution. It does not free individuals, families or groups from energy exploitation. Second, I am not convinced about the waste that like you said, "It gets buried in the dessert." The people is tired of monopolies. They want to be more than an economic slave object of someone else's greed and manipulative, speculative power.

one plant produces a barrel of waste every ten years...well perhaps two... we need these plants for our childrens future. It is about energy independence. Everyone hears the word nuclear, and say "sweet baby jesus, we need to protest" come on now, this is so much cleaner than coal, oil, gas....who care if the waste is buried in the desert, I as many others have no plans to sit there and sip ice tea and look at a sign that reads "nuclear waste buried here".

People talk about burying nuclear waste in "the desert" as if nobody lived there. Las Vegas, Reno, Tucson, Phoenix and hundreds of small and mid-sized communities. I know that everybody on this site already knows this (so I will repeat it just to be REALLY annoying), but the American deserts also have complex ecosystems that simply use water extremely efficiently. Most people in the country would like to see our waste buried in the desert because, despite all these communities, the vast majority don't live in or near the desert. Ironically, most of these people live near a nuclear power plant, however. So they benefit from the electric energy generated by the plants but want no part of the waste. I am not saying that is shocking, but doesn't there seem to be a fairnes issue here? If you take the power from the plant shouldn't you take the risk associated with the waste as well? You don't want to take that risk? Well, you don't HAVE to live near the nuclear power plants, of course. You COULD live in or near one of the deserts. Well, no of course you wouldn't want to live there, what with all that nuclear waste and everything... Hey, there is a TON of room in Yellowstone Park...and hardly anybody lives THERE either!

On a more serious note, I have always wondered a little at what the economics would be of locating a kind of grid of nuclear power plants, all in fairly close proximity in something like an irreparable Superfund area. You know, some place our society has already turned into a wasteland where nothing is going to grow for a few centuries anyway -- and then shipping that power all over the country. I know that transmission facilities are massive investments and therefore add greatly to the cost of shipping power, but I still wonder about the trade-off of generating all that power in a single location, burying the waste on-site and then shipping it. Probably already been pencilled out and into the waste can...

I think the revival of nuclear power is a cop-out strategy, because many don't believe we will be able to change our energy system in time to curb the effects of climate change. The change to a sustainable energy infrastructure will take many small and big steps and it probably seems too difficult to achieve with the powers that be (energy efficiency investments, renewable energy technologies, sustainability concepts in agriculture, manufacturing, design, etc.). So to that extent I can understand that some environmentalists are advocating for nuclear energy.
However, buy returning to nuclear energy, we would divert vast amounts of money and political momentum from the huge opportunity we have this decade to finally start implementing sustainable ways of doing business.
Nuclear energy is only economically feasible because you, the tax payer, guarantee the loans to build it, take over its insurance risk, pay for its protection, and pay for finding final storage sites that will have to be operated and safeguarded for hundreds of years to come. The private market would by itself never finance this technology that relies on a centralized, near monopolistic energy system.
However, investments in efficiency measures, sustainable production, building, design etc, as well as, to an increasing degree, various renewable energy technologies can be financed on the private market without government subsidies today.
All it takes is the government to stop pumping billions in subsidies to the coal, oil, and nuclear industries, make a commitment to promote sustainability measures politically so the energy market will be more open to new players, and the free, de-centralized market will do its magic.
The N.I.M.B.Y. problem as stated in the article and the fact that there is still no final storage site in the world (!) in operation after decades of funding and researching, with billions of dollars spent, tells me, it's just not viable to continue to produce more nuclear waste, how little it may be.
The article above has been continued: http://www.care2.com/causes/global-warming/blog/is-nuclear-power-a-panacea-to-gl...