There's far more financial incentive behind Nuclea EnergyQuote:
Originally Posted by Bubba
than there is in Wind. It's in everything from the mining of
raw resources (by the way, mining uranium has led to a
whole mess of human rights issues) to disposing of the
I live in Utah, where a lot of Nuclear Waste is, or will be
placed. There's a company here, EnergySolutions, that
pulls in a half-billion dollars / year in revenue disposing
of Nuclear Waste. And there's not even a whole lot to
dispose of right now. Imagine how much potential money
could be made if the country were to embrace Nuclear
Power as the de facto standard of energy production?
Most advocates of Wind Power (and other renewables)
have absolutely no vested, personal interest it them.
They advocate it because it's the best solution.
It's actually much, much worse that what the media isQuote:
It certainly is not as bad as the news makes it sound b/c the state capital where I used to live also had a coal-fired power plant. The pollution is pure white and not the black sooty stuff you used to see in the old movies from the 50's.
conveying. The "pure white" is Co2. That's the biggest
problem we're facing. And the reason why it is a problem
is because Co2 is transparent to visible light, but blocks
infrared light (heat). So after the sunbeams have hit the
Earth and reflect back as heat, that heat becomes
trapped in the troposphere.
People have some problem accepting Global Warming
as a threat, when it's an extremely logical conclusion that
requires only a basic knowledge of physics & chemistry.
These people say that a100 years of documented
temperatures aren't enough to infer that Global Warming
is taking place. They will also say that the Earth has
experienced periods of higher and lower average
temperatures. Both of which are absolutely true.
But when you put so much Co2 into the atmosphere, and
when Co2 has been scientifically proven to absorb and
emit infrared light (heat) the logical conclusion is that
the more Co2 you put into the air, the less heat will be
able to escape.
Because of Co2, permafrost is melting. When permafrost
melts, it releases methane (this is in addition to all the
other sources of methane released) into the atmosphere.
Methane, like Co2, also absorbs and emits infrared heat;
only it's much more potent than Co2.
Anyway, that creates positive feedback. Eventually we
won't be able to do anything about it. It'll become a runaway
greenhouse effect and Earth will turn into Venus. The
situation is far worse than what the media is saying.
The problem isn't even the temperatures themselves; it's the
rate of change.
The thing is, the dirty particles that have been emitted intoQuote:
I'm assuming most of the pollutants are caught by the scrubbers.
the atmosphere have actually been masking the true effects
of Global Warming. Each particle attracts water molecules, which,
when in the atmosphere, reflect the sunlight away from the
planet before it has a chance to become radiated heat