BP oil mess

[bcmaui]

You bring up an interesting point.

When Americans think of nuclear power, they think of potential nuclear fallout. They see the 30-year-old reactors and can't fathom that those things could be safe. We (royal "we" not me "we" or "wee wee") need to realize that other countries have new reactors that are much safer (just think about how far along technology has come in the last 30 years) and that we're capable of building as safe or safer facilities now. Fight terrorism: stop buying their oil.

Nuclear has always been a challenge. France generates the largest percentage, about 75%, of it's electricity from nuclear power.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_by_country

It's the waste and disposal issue that is nasty. The ocean will clean itself once the leak is plugged in the gulf in a couple of years, nuclear waste will take many thousands of years to degrade. There is no simple solution. I'm doing my best to encourage solar, wind and biofuel development to replace petroleum in my neighborhood as they make sense here and have comparable costs in our market. I am caught in a quandry - I would love to see you all pay $0.30 per kWh to help encourage the mainland to make the transistion, but I am opposed to carbon taxes as that money most likely will be sucked off to non-related government payroll expenses and will not be spent on improving the nation's electrical grid and constructing renewable power plants. Carbon taxes will make power more expensive and prolong dependence on fossil fuels as it will be a critical source of revenue for other government programs as currently is in Europe.

[boobookittyfuk]

BC...run for president, you have my vote

[ajlewis13]

Thanks for killing the ocean, fuckers!

[11amas]

I think we are closer to dealing with the waste than we were 30 years ago by far: http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/nuclear ... -wasteland

Solar is great but what about at night? How about in Seattle or other largely cloudy places? The Sierra Club wants to end hydroelectric; bird and bat lovers hate wind power; solar is super expensive still and doesn't help at night. We need a bridge to a better energy source without massive costs.

wtf does this have to do with bp, lol, if I drink more I am sure I will figure this tangent out.

[11amas]

From BP to us...suck it!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fG-e2dHJJTU

Sorry, couldn't resist.

[bcmaui]

I think we are closer to dealing with the waste than we were 30 years ago by far: http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/nuclear ... -wasteland

Solar is great but what about at night? How about in Seattle or other largely cloudy places? The Sierra Club wants to end hydroelectric; bird and bat lovers hate wind power; solar is super expensive still and doesn't help at night. We need a bridge to a better energy source without massive costs.

I agree - Wind and solar are limited and we need a comprehensive solution - either through more efficient storage of excess wind and solar, or some other complementary fuel source that we can rely on from domestic sources - natural gas and coal are our current sources, but there are pollution drawbacks to using them and they are finite. Wind, solar, hydro are all renewable. When it comes down to it everything is derived from solar power - fossil/plant fuels are just antique forms of stored solar energy.

Solar PV is expensive, but it is less expensive for me over a 20 year period than my current electric rates. Solar thermal (hot water) can be some of the cheapest and simplest technology out there - a complete modern system can be installed for less than the price of a designer Subzero refrigerator. And it works in cloudy conditions as well - you just may need a few more roof panels to adjust for climate. If you heat 90% of your water with the sun and use traditional energy for backup, you are saving your own money by shifting your source of energy consumption without sacrificing quality of life. But you are right - what may be good in Arizona may not be good in Seattle - but they have more hydro potential than AZ. There is no one solution. In AZ you are in solar paradise.

China has by far more of an installed base of hot water panels for domestic water heating than any other country in the world and I'm sure they are even simpler than the systems we use here - they would not be doing it if it was expensive - see the table at the bottom:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_water_heating

Also at the bottom of the link above a typical US thermal solar system will pay for itself in 20 years at the average rate of $0.10 per kWh. At $0.30 in Hawaii my system has started to make money for me as it has been in use for 8 years already and other than draining my water heater tank on an annual basis (which I would do anyway for a regular tank), there is no maintenance. If I lived in a less rainy area, I would wash off the panels on the roof once a year as well.

If nuclear fuel recycling has improved dramatically, I am willing to consider it part of the mix as long as we are not replacing payments to tyrants for oil to payments to tyrants for nuclear fuel. I happen to live in a "nuclear power free" state (except for the military), so it is not an option I have studied much or kept up with as it is not feasible in my local area.

[TheDarkSide]

[bcmaui]

Back to the BP mess - Interesting opinion article in the news yesterday from a Hawaii congressman:

"Hawaii GOP Rep. Charles Djou, who won his seat in a special election last month, says he's "disappointed" that Mr. Obama has failed to waive the Jones Act, an antiquated 1920 law mandating that goods shipped between U.S. ports be handled by U.S.-built and -owned ships manned by U.S. crews. Unions fiercely support the law as a means of preserving U.S. jobs. In this case, though, the law might be hindering the recovery of hundreds of thousands of Gulf Coast jobs.

Mr. Obama could issue a full waiver of the Jones Act, but failed even to mention the law in his speech last night. In the wake of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, the Bush administration didn't hesitate to waive the law completely in an emergency. Congressman Djou says a waiver is essential in spurring the Gulf Coast cleanup. The Houston Chronicle reports that several countries offered to send sophisticated equipment immediately after the spill but were turned down. The Dutch government offered ships fitted with oil-skimming booms three days after the leak began. Geert Visser, the consul general for the Netherlands in Houston, said the answer from the Obama administration was "Thanks, but no thanks.""

Later on in the article he mentions he still wants the Jones Act to apply outside of the area of the oil spill, including Hawaii.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 51666.html