Comments on: Bring Nuclear Energy Back to its Atomic Roots http://www.babeled.com/2008/07/21/bring-nuclear-energy-back-to-its-atomic-roots/ Six guys who have never been in your kitchen. Wed, 17 Mar 2010 17:06:11 -0700 hourly 1 By: Jack Gamble - Man Overboard http://www.babeled.com/2008/07/21/bring-nuclear-energy-back-to-its-atomic-roots/#comment-33146 Jack Gamble - Man Overboard Sun, 11 Jan 2009 02:11:08 +0000 http://www.babeled.com/?p=377#comment-33146 You make a good point Gman. I didn't realize the NRC was once called the AEC, interesting. You make a good point Gman. I didn’t realize the NRC was once called the AEC, interesting.

]]> By: gman http://www.babeled.com/2008/07/21/bring-nuclear-energy-back-to-its-atomic-roots/#comment-33143 gman Sun, 11 Jan 2009 01:52:08 +0000 http://www.babeled.com/?p=377#comment-33143 well if I recall correctly, we went with the term "nuclear" in the early 1970's because someone noted that "atomic" reminded people of the "atomic bomb," a device actually used by the US. One example of the name change - the AEC was split up to became the NRC (to regulate the nuclear reactors), and (bizarrely) the "dept of energy" to oversee the weapons program...yes I know I'm simplifying some, but that's how it turned out. well if I recall correctly, we went with the term “nuclear” in the early 1970’s because someone noted that “atomic” reminded people of the “atomic bomb,” a device actually used by the US. One example of the name change – the AEC was split up to became the NRC (to regulate the nuclear reactors), and (bizarrely) the “dept of energy” to oversee the weapons program…yes I know I’m simplifying some, but that’s how it turned out.

]]> By: Energy Diversity is the Solution | Atlas Editorials http://www.babeled.com/2008/07/21/bring-nuclear-energy-back-to-its-atomic-roots/#comment-12538 Energy Diversity is the Solution | Atlas Editorials Mon, 29 Sep 2008 13:22:30 +0000 http://www.babeled.com/?p=377#comment-12538 [...] clean and extremely cheap once you do the math.  There is a great discussion on blog site Babeled which proves this.  The biggest concern with this type of power is safety.  When things go wrong [...] [...] clean and extremely cheap once you do the math.  There is a great discussion on blog site Babeled which proves this.  The biggest concern with this type of power is safety.  When things go wrong [...]

]]> By: Uncle B http://www.babeled.com/2008/07/21/bring-nuclear-energy-back-to-its-atomic-roots/#comment-8333 Uncle B Mon, 04 Aug 2008 16:02:49 +0000 http://www.babeled.com/?p=377#comment-8333 It will take a lot of reactors to arrive at a point where Solar, wave and wind power can become self-sustaining. Don't count on oil to get us to this point, we are out of cheap oil and almost out of oil at any price! We need a President who serves America, not big oil or big business - If the U.S. had chosen to be a moral people, and leaving Iraqi oil alone, and following Al Gore, decided to develop the South Western deserts, with the technology of the times - solar/thermal-molten sodium - electricity installations, for the same amount of money as that war cost, ($650 Billion), today, we would be tapping into the largest, renewable, sustainable, energy source the world has ever known. It would have paid every energy bill in the U.S.A. for maintenance fees only - FOREVER! It would be equivalent to an oil field that can NEVER run dry! Low cost electric power, and storeable hydrogen gasoline replacement from the electricity, for all! After the millions of murders, and $650 billions of dollars, borrowed from our children’s futures and pissed away, with thousands of our own and others maimed and disfigured for life, millions of families utterly destroyed, ours and theirs, we are no closer to Iraqi oil production than the Iraqis are! The next time you hear a blithering idiot spoiled brat, drunken, drug addicted, sociopath, rich Arabic saber dancing daddie’s boy oilman, stand at a microphone and threaten YOUR safety with someone ELSE’S weapons, remember what you lost America, remember, and weep! (also see http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=a-solar-grand-plan) It will take a lot of reactors to arrive at a point where Solar, wave and wind power can become self-sustaining. Don’t count on oil to get us to this point, we are out of cheap oil and almost out of oil at any price! We need a President who serves America, not big oil or big business – If the U.S. had chosen to be a moral people, and leaving Iraqi oil alone, and following Al Gore, decided to develop the South Western deserts, with the technology of the times – solar/thermal-molten sodium – electricity installations, for the same amount of money as that war cost, ($650 Billion), today, we would be tapping into the largest, renewable, sustainable, energy source the world has ever known. It would have paid every energy bill in the U.S.A. for maintenance fees only – FOREVER! It would be equivalent to an oil field that can NEVER run dry! Low cost electric power, and storeable hydrogen gasoline replacement from the electricity, for all!
After the millions of murders, and $650 billions of dollars, borrowed from our children’s futures and pissed away, with thousands of our own and others maimed and disfigured for life, millions of families utterly destroyed, ours and theirs, we are no closer to Iraqi oil production than the Iraqis are!
The next time you hear a blithering idiot spoiled brat, drunken, drug addicted, sociopath, rich Arabic saber dancing daddie’s boy oilman, stand at a microphone and threaten YOUR safety with someone ELSE’S weapons, remember what you lost America, remember, and weep! (also see http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=a-solar-grand-plan)

]]> By: Greg Molyneux http://www.babeled.com/2008/07/21/bring-nuclear-energy-back-to-its-atomic-roots/#comment-8067 Greg Molyneux Wed, 30 Jul 2008 20:22:36 +0000 http://www.babeled.com/?p=377#comment-8067 <blockquote>The only way nuclear energy will have a swift revolution during this war on terror, is if it is supported and praised on national television by an extremely popular president (Obama 2008 - 2016).</blockquote> ...did you Tarot cards tell you this?

The only way nuclear energy will have a swift revolution during this war on terror, is if it is supported and praised on national television by an extremely popular president (Obama 2008 – 2016).

…did you Tarot cards tell you this?

]]> By: Andrew Blanco http://www.babeled.com/2008/07/21/bring-nuclear-energy-back-to-its-atomic-roots/#comment-8038 Andrew Blanco Wed, 30 Jul 2008 01:53:25 +0000 http://www.babeled.com/?p=377#comment-8038 Jack, I 100% agree with what you are saying. I just wonder whether the majority of Americans will. Fear clouds the truth no matter how obvious it is. I mean, you could go on a lecture circuit and talk on all the news channels about how safe nuclear plants are and about how they aren't prime targets for terrorists...but if the majority are fixated on ideas of radioactive waste and a repeat of Chernobyl, then you can forget any effort to educate the majority. The only way nuclear energy will have a swift revolution during this war on terror, is if it is supported and praised on national television by an extremely popular president (Obama 2008 - 2016). Other than that, fear trumps truth. (Bush reelection 2004) Jack,

I 100% agree with what you are saying. I just wonder whether the majority of Americans will.

Fear clouds the truth no matter how obvious it is. I mean, you could go on a lecture circuit and talk on all the news channels about how safe nuclear plants are and about how they aren’t prime targets for terrorists…but if the majority are fixated on ideas of radioactive waste and a repeat of Chernobyl, then you can forget any effort to educate the majority.

The only way nuclear energy will have a swift revolution during this war on terror, is if it is supported and praised on national television by an extremely popular president (Obama 2008 – 2016).

Other than that, fear trumps truth. (Bush reelection 2004)

]]> By: Greg Molyneux http://www.babeled.com/2008/07/21/bring-nuclear-energy-back-to-its-atomic-roots/#comment-8009 Greg Molyneux Tue, 29 Jul 2008 14:58:47 +0000 http://www.babeled.com/?p=377#comment-8009 "terrorism is a lousy excuse to not do something" ...excellent point Jack! “terrorism is a lousy excuse to not do something”

…excellent point Jack!

]]> By: Jack Gamble - Man Overboard http://www.babeled.com/2008/07/21/bring-nuclear-energy-back-to-its-atomic-roots/#comment-7988 Jack Gamble - Man Overboard Tue, 29 Jul 2008 02:23:35 +0000 http://www.babeled.com/?p=377#comment-7988 Andrew, You do realize that both planes that hit the trade center on 911 flew right past the reactor at Nine Mile Point. The reason being there are targets that are much softer, easier to hit, and more effective to hit than a nuclear power plant. Also let's try to remember, terrorism is a lousy excuse to not do something. The longer we go without building nuclear the longer we finance terrorism when we fill our tanks. Andrew,

You do realize that both planes that hit the trade center on 911 flew right past the reactor at Nine Mile Point.

The reason being there are targets that are much softer, easier to hit, and more effective to hit than a nuclear power plant.

Also let’s try to remember, terrorism is a lousy excuse to not do something. The longer we go without building nuclear the longer we finance terrorism when we fill our tanks.

]]> By: Greg Molyneux http://www.babeled.com/2008/07/21/bring-nuclear-energy-back-to-its-atomic-roots/#comment-7728 Greg Molyneux Thu, 24 Jul 2008 19:58:47 +0000 http://www.babeled.com/?p=377#comment-7728 Okay good. I was a little confused for a moment. Not that confusing me is a tough thing to do. Okay good. I was a little confused for a moment. Not that confusing me is a tough thing to do.

]]> By: Andrew Blanco http://www.babeled.com/2008/07/21/bring-nuclear-energy-back-to-its-atomic-roots/#comment-7727 Andrew Blanco Thu, 24 Jul 2008 19:55:52 +0000 http://www.babeled.com/?p=377#comment-7727 I read the post, but I was responding specifically to Jack's statement that the security issue is moot. I threw your name in cause I thought I read you agreeing with him on this, but looking back you never did. I read the post, but I was responding specifically to Jack’s statement that the security issue is moot. I threw your name in cause I thought I read you agreeing with him on this, but looking back you never did.

]]>