Comments

  • Mphorsley

    Ban nuclear power….vote for solar.

  • http://growthisnotsustainable.blogspot.com/ Growth is not sustainable

    Well I’d like to see the waste sent to the sun for disposal, but that’s pretty expensive, and dangerous.
    However, all the people who hate nuclear because of its dangers and waste seem to give coal a bye. How about all that CO2 that these plants store in our atmosphere. Free garbage dump for them, a dangerous climate change for us. I also doubt that those most against nuclear realize we in the US get 20% of our electricity from nuclear. How many accidents have been reported? Deaths? Compare that to coal.
    France adopted nuclear decades ago. They’re doing alright… don’t see many of them glowing in the dark.

    So yes, the waste is a problem, but it’s a few tons of waste, compared the the gigatons of CO2 in the atmosphere that we currently do not have the technology to remove.

  • # FRE0

    Change our nuclear energy technology; use thorium instead of uranium.

    Thorium reactors avoid most of the problems associated with uranium reactors:

    http://energyfromthorium.com/

  • http://www.hoanw.org Gerry Pollet

    For information on the environmental risks from reprocessing, see the July testimony of Gerry Pollet, Heart of America Northwest, to the Blue Ribbon Commission also posted on line at http://www.hoanw.org

    “Reprocessing” is the melting down of the used High-Level Nuclear Waste fuel rods to extract Plutonium and Uranium. This is the same process used to extract the Plutonium and Uranium for nuclear weapons, which created the deadly liquid High-Level Nuclear Wastes sitting in tanks (many of which have leaked) at the Energy Department’s Hanford Nuclear Reservation alongside the Columbia River in Washington State. Making more liquid High-Level Nuclear Waste only makes a bad problem far worse.

  • summulus

    This program’s abysmally shallow and, probably purposeful, SOS regarding `waste’ is why PBS won’t be getting any support from this citizen.

    http://eashtrg.rollo.com.au/IntegralFastReactor-Hardy-29Apr2010.pdf
    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/interviews/till.html

    Not only can all the stored `spent’ fuel rods (99% of energy still available) be used up but, those thousands of metric tons at K25 (Oak Ridge) are waiting to be used as well. And, leave waste the activity of which is measured in hundreds of years. Do some actual reporting.
    We should be leapfrogging ahead of the Chinese (building more reactors at present than U.S. did at ht. of the `Atomic Age’).
    Clean, baseload, electricity, built out rapidly. Energy Independence would be a reality with Integral Fast Reactors (solve waste problem/enough fuel to power U.S. far past the death of the sun). Solar and wind are clean but will never be 24/7 terawattage Baseload and clean.

    Tired of windmillage and `drill baby drill’ – solar? Only insofar as we set the controls for the heart of the sun and light this candle.

    With enough electricity, many things become possible:
    http://www.lanl.gov/news/newsbulletin/pdf/Green_Freedom_Overview.pdf

  • Gregory Cragg

    The Problem of How to safely store nuclear waste has been solved!!  When the idea was offered to the OBAMA administration DoE, they would not reply. My idea answers ALL of the related problems for safer storage of all types of Nuclear Wastes!! As well offers One million years for storage (I can prove all I say) The Blue Ribbon Commission was told of what I have but did not want to speak to me as they are a smoke screen, they were to find a solution, I have one, they never called me back.
    The idea is worth untold billions, as before the Japanese Nuclear crisis, Japan wanted to host an international nuclear repository, as the annual storage fees are over ninety billion US per year, and growing–I have the simpl;e technology that can do this, if anyone is interested!!