<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Does Nuclear Power Compete With Conservation, Wind, Solar and Biomass?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/</link>
	<description>Clean Tech News &#38; Views: Solar Energy News. Wind Energy News. EV News. &#38; More.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 14:46:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: john</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-82549</link>
		<dc:creator>john</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Jan 2011 02:40:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-82549</guid>
		<description>In the history of nuclear power there have been 2 accidents In the history of coal power there have been thousands of accidents and deaths. Chernobyl is not possible in the states because our reactors are not built in the back of a shed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the history of nuclear power there have been 2 accidents In the history of coal power there have been thousands of accidents and deaths. Chernobyl is not possible in the states because our reactors are not built in the back of a shed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rob</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-290</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2010 03:04:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-290</guid>
		<description>People don&#039;t think about the manufacturing process of solar panels and the batteries required to store the electricity.  It&#039;s not exactly a clean technology.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>People don&#8217;t think about the manufacturing process of solar panels and the batteries required to store the electricity.  It&#8217;s not exactly a clean technology.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rob</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-17461</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2010 03:04:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-17461</guid>
		<description>People don&#039;t think about the manufacturing process of solar panels and the batteries required to store the electricity.  It&#039;s not exactly a clean technology.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>People don&#8217;t think about the manufacturing process of solar panels and the batteries required to store the electricity.  It&#8217;s not exactly a clean technology.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thomas</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-289</link>
		<dc:creator>Thomas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 22:51:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-289</guid>
		<description>Think about the $7.1 billion required each year to make nuclear affordable...Your metaphor should be a bus with lead tires, and mutated crack heads.



Solar Thermal Power plants are more affordable, and are cost competative with Nuclear plants, even with the unfair incentives given to the nuclear industry. Do some research on Solar Thermal Power Plants and you will find they are the best renewable power source out there... unless the sun stops shining... Then Nuclear will be the only option.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Think about the $7.1 billion required each year to make nuclear affordable&#8230;Your metaphor should be a bus with lead tires, and mutated crack heads.</p>
<p>Solar Thermal Power plants are more affordable, and are cost competative with Nuclear plants, even with the unfair incentives given to the nuclear industry. Do some research on Solar Thermal Power Plants and you will find they are the best renewable power source out there&#8230; unless the sun stops shining&#8230; Then Nuclear will be the only option.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thomas</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-17460</link>
		<dc:creator>Thomas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 22:51:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-17460</guid>
		<description>Think about the $7.1 billion required each year to make nuclear affordable...Your metaphor should be a bus with lead tires, and mutated crack heads.



Solar Thermal Power plants are more affordable, and are cost competative with Nuclear plants, even with the unfair incentives given to the nuclear industry. Do some research on Solar Thermal Power Plants and you will find they are the best renewable power source out there... unless the sun stops shining... Then Nuclear will be the only option.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Think about the $7.1 billion required each year to make nuclear affordable&#8230;Your metaphor should be a bus with lead tires, and mutated crack heads.</p>
<p>Solar Thermal Power plants are more affordable, and are cost competative with Nuclear plants, even with the unfair incentives given to the nuclear industry. Do some research on Solar Thermal Power Plants and you will find they are the best renewable power source out there&#8230; unless the sun stops shining&#8230; Then Nuclear will be the only option.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mateo</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-288</link>
		<dc:creator>Mateo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 16:08:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-288</guid>
		<description>1. Its spelled fusion

2. yes reprossesing can make much less waste

3. there are no FUSION reactors only fisson

4. when fusion is made we will have a virtualy infinite supply of energy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>1. Its spelled fusion</p>
<p>2. yes reprossesing can make much less waste</p>
<p>3. there are no FUSION reactors only fisson</p>
<p>4. when fusion is made we will have a virtualy infinite supply of energy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mateo</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-17459</link>
		<dc:creator>Mateo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 16:08:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-17459</guid>
		<description>1. Its spelled fusion

2. yes reprossesing can make much less waste

3. there are no FUSION reactors only fisson

4. when fusion is made we will have a virtualy infinite supply of energy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>1. Its spelled fusion</p>
<p>2. yes reprossesing can make much less waste</p>
<p>3. there are no FUSION reactors only fisson</p>
<p>4. when fusion is made we will have a virtualy infinite supply of energy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert Gailor Justice</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-287</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert Gailor Justice</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2008 08:15:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-287</guid>
		<description>Dear Rod:

One of the things that has always puzzled me is, Can nuclear fussion destroy the by-products of a nuclear fission reaction? If so then in 50-100 years we may be able to destroy these fission wastes when we develop fussion reactors. As you have said with breeder reactors we can minimize nuclear wastes and with reprocessing and nuclear fussion we can destroy the leftovers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Rod:</p>
<p>One of the things that has always puzzled me is, Can nuclear fussion destroy the by-products of a nuclear fission reaction? If so then in 50-100 years we may be able to destroy these fission wastes when we develop fussion reactors. As you have said with breeder reactors we can minimize nuclear wastes and with reprocessing and nuclear fussion we can destroy the leftovers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rod Adams</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-286</link>
		<dc:creator>Rod Adams</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2008 21:05:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-286</guid>
		<description>Joe:



Thank you for your comment.



The nuclear industry workers and designers did indeed learn a lot from TMI. It has been used as a case study in countless training sessions, not just for the specifics of that particular incident, but also for some general understanding of how to respond in cases where there are confusing indications.



Designers have learned a lot about how to provide operators with better warnings and indications that do not overwhelm with thousands of flashing lights.



Unfortunately, the industry has not done a good job of advertising its improvements.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Joe:</p>
<p>Thank you for your comment.</p>
<p>The nuclear industry workers and designers did indeed learn a lot from TMI. It has been used as a case study in countless training sessions, not just for the specifics of that particular incident, but also for some general understanding of how to respond in cases where there are confusing indications.</p>
<p>Designers have learned a lot about how to provide operators with better warnings and indications that do not overwhelm with thousands of flashing lights.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, the industry has not done a good job of advertising its improvements.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rod Adams</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-17458</link>
		<dc:creator>Rod Adams</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2008 21:05:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-17458</guid>
		<description>Joe:



Thank you for your comment.



The nuclear industry workers and designers did indeed learn a lot from TMI. It has been used as a case study in countless training sessions, not just for the specifics of that particular incident, but also for some general understanding of how to respond in cases where there are confusing indications.



Designers have learned a lot about how to provide operators with better warnings and indications that do not overwhelm with thousands of flashing lights.



Unfortunately, the industry has not done a good job of advertising its improvements.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Joe:</p>
<p>Thank you for your comment.</p>
<p>The nuclear industry workers and designers did indeed learn a lot from TMI. It has been used as a case study in countless training sessions, not just for the specifics of that particular incident, but also for some general understanding of how to respond in cases where there are confusing indications.</p>
<p>Designers have learned a lot about how to provide operators with better warnings and indications that do not overwhelm with thousands of flashing lights.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, the industry has not done a good job of advertising its improvements.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe Nuke</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-285</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe Nuke</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2008 17:32:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-285</guid>
		<description>It is truly amazing how the media pushes the liberal agenda.  It is always referred to as the Three Mile Island DISASTER!  Oh no!  Scary.



The facts are that not one person was killed or even injured as a result of this incident.  I toured the TMI plant, and heard a step-by step recount of the incident from the man who was the control room operator at the time.  What should have happened as a result of TMI is that we should have LEARNED.  Instead of taking our new knowledge of these largely human factors problems, the media painted this incident as a dangerous and catastrophic disaster.



The media continues to push this agenda today.  What is the liberal media&#039;s answer to our energy crisis?  Conservation?  Really?



We cannot force conservation.  We cannot regulate conservation.  Any attempts to would be silly.  Are we going to monitor individual citizen’s houses to make sure they turn the lights off when they leave the room?  Don&#039;t be ridiculous.



We need more efficiency.  And, as I think most of you fine posters have pointed out, you just can&#039;t beat nuclear at efficiency. (or safety for that matter...check out some of the European news stories concerning wind turbine accidents.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is truly amazing how the media pushes the liberal agenda.  It is always referred to as the Three Mile Island DISASTER!  Oh no!  Scary.</p>
<p>The facts are that not one person was killed or even injured as a result of this incident.  I toured the TMI plant, and heard a step-by step recount of the incident from the man who was the control room operator at the time.  What should have happened as a result of TMI is that we should have LEARNED.  Instead of taking our new knowledge of these largely human factors problems, the media painted this incident as a dangerous and catastrophic disaster.</p>
<p>The media continues to push this agenda today.  What is the liberal media&#8217;s answer to our energy crisis?  Conservation?  Really?</p>
<p>We cannot force conservation.  We cannot regulate conservation.  Any attempts to would be silly.  Are we going to monitor individual citizen’s houses to make sure they turn the lights off when they leave the room?  Don&#8217;t be ridiculous.</p>
<p>We need more efficiency.  And, as I think most of you fine posters have pointed out, you just can&#8217;t beat nuclear at efficiency. (or safety for that matter&#8230;check out some of the European news stories concerning wind turbine accidents.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe Nuke</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-17457</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe Nuke</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2008 17:32:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-17457</guid>
		<description>It is truly amazing how the media pushes the liberal agenda.  It is always referred to as the Three Mile Island DISASTER!  Oh no!  Scary.



The facts are that not one person was killed or even injured as a result of this incident.  I toured the TMI plant, and heard a step-by step recount of the incident from the man who was the control room operator at the time.  What should have happened as a result of TMI is that we should have LEARNED.  Instead of taking our new knowledge of these largely human factors problems, the media painted this incident as a dangerous and catastrophic disaster.



The media continues to push this agenda today.  What is the liberal media&#039;s answer to our energy crisis?  Conservation?  Really?



We cannot force conservation.  We cannot regulate conservation.  Any attempts to would be silly.  Are we going to monitor individual citizen’s houses to make sure they turn the lights off when they leave the room?  Don&#039;t be ridiculous.



We need more efficiency.  And, as I think most of you fine posters have pointed out, you just can&#039;t beat nuclear at efficiency. (or safety for that matter...check out some of the European news stories concerning wind turbine accidents.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is truly amazing how the media pushes the liberal agenda.  It is always referred to as the Three Mile Island DISASTER!  Oh no!  Scary.</p>
<p>The facts are that not one person was killed or even injured as a result of this incident.  I toured the TMI plant, and heard a step-by step recount of the incident from the man who was the control room operator at the time.  What should have happened as a result of TMI is that we should have LEARNED.  Instead of taking our new knowledge of these largely human factors problems, the media painted this incident as a dangerous and catastrophic disaster.</p>
<p>The media continues to push this agenda today.  What is the liberal media&#8217;s answer to our energy crisis?  Conservation?  Really?</p>
<p>We cannot force conservation.  We cannot regulate conservation.  Any attempts to would be silly.  Are we going to monitor individual citizen’s houses to make sure they turn the lights off when they leave the room?  Don&#8217;t be ridiculous.</p>
<p>We need more efficiency.  And, as I think most of you fine posters have pointed out, you just can&#8217;t beat nuclear at efficiency. (or safety for that matter&#8230;check out some of the European news stories concerning wind turbine accidents.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David McClellan</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-284</link>
		<dc:creator>David McClellan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Jul 2008 23:12:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-284</guid>
		<description>Early last spring I was walking through Barnes &amp; Noble and, on the spur of the moment, I picked up a copy of the book, &quot;Power to Save the World  The Truth about Nuclear Power&quot; by Gwyneth Cravens, published by Knopf with ISBN 978-0-307-26656-9.



This is a very careful and very interesting examination of the nuclear power industry starting with mining of uranium through power production to disposal of wastes.  I&#039;ve read the darn book three times and am now starting a fourth and I would recommend it for the uninitiated.



The author, once a Long Island anti-nuclear activist who participated in efforts leading to the tragedy of the closing of the Shoreham plant by judicial decree before it produced a single watt of power, as a result of her study of the nuclear power cycle, is now a nuclear power supporter.



Other notes:  The nuclear power disasters at Chernobyl and Three Mile Island Unit Two incidents were vastly overplayed by a minimally competent, non-understanding media and have lead to the idea that a nuclear accident could endanger millions.  Hogwash!  The carbon dioxide emitted by coal fired power plants has done and will do far worse damage.



Yes, we (including France) can have and do have fool proof, safe nuclear power plants.  Yes, we can reprocess spent fuel rods to extend the life of uranium deposits which are plentiful.   Yes, we can store spent fuel rods safely and the Wast Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico is an example of how to do this.



Yes, we need to also use renewables such as hydroelectric, wind power and solar energy but with the recognition that they will never suffice to provide all the electric power the world needs and the world needs more electric power every day.



Finally, the best newspaper article I&#039;ve read in twenty years announced this spring that the Southern Company had applied for permission to construct two new nuclear steam generators in addition to its two existing 1215 megawatt units that have been on line near Waynesboro, Georgia since 1987.  Finally!  A bright, shining light in the gloom.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Early last spring I was walking through Barnes &amp; Noble and, on the spur of the moment, I picked up a copy of the book, &#8220;Power to Save the World  The Truth about Nuclear Power&#8221; by Gwyneth Cravens, published by Knopf with ISBN 978-0-307-26656-9.</p>
<p>This is a very careful and very interesting examination of the nuclear power industry starting with mining of uranium through power production to disposal of wastes.  I&#8217;ve read the darn book three times and am now starting a fourth and I would recommend it for the uninitiated.</p>
<p>The author, once a Long Island anti-nuclear activist who participated in efforts leading to the tragedy of the closing of the Shoreham plant by judicial decree before it produced a single watt of power, as a result of her study of the nuclear power cycle, is now a nuclear power supporter.</p>
<p>Other notes:  The nuclear power disasters at Chernobyl and Three Mile Island Unit Two incidents were vastly overplayed by a minimally competent, non-understanding media and have lead to the idea that a nuclear accident could endanger millions.  Hogwash!  The carbon dioxide emitted by coal fired power plants has done and will do far worse damage.</p>
<p>Yes, we (including France) can have and do have fool proof, safe nuclear power plants.  Yes, we can reprocess spent fuel rods to extend the life of uranium deposits which are plentiful.   Yes, we can store spent fuel rods safely and the Wast Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico is an example of how to do this.</p>
<p>Yes, we need to also use renewables such as hydroelectric, wind power and solar energy but with the recognition that they will never suffice to provide all the electric power the world needs and the world needs more electric power every day.</p>
<p>Finally, the best newspaper article I&#8217;ve read in twenty years announced this spring that the Southern Company had applied for permission to construct two new nuclear steam generators in addition to its two existing 1215 megawatt units that have been on line near Waynesboro, Georgia since 1987.  Finally!  A bright, shining light in the gloom.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David McClellan</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-17456</link>
		<dc:creator>David McClellan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Jul 2008 23:12:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-17456</guid>
		<description>Early last spring I was walking through Barnes &amp; Noble and, on the spur of the moment, I picked up a copy of the book, &quot;Power to Save the World  The Truth about Nuclear Power&quot; by Gwyneth Cravens, published by Knopf with ISBN 978-0-307-26656-9.



This is a very careful and very interesting examination of the nuclear power industry starting with mining of uranium through power production to disposal of wastes.  I&#039;ve read the darn book three times and am now starting a fourth and I would recommend it for the uninitiated.



The author, once a Long Island anti-nuclear activist who participated in efforts leading to the tragedy of the closing of the Shoreham plant by judicial decree before it produced a single watt of power, as a result of her study of the nuclear power cycle, is now a nuclear power supporter.



Other notes:  The nuclear power disasters at Chernobyl and Three Mile Island Unit Two incidents were vastly overplayed by a minimally competent, non-understanding media and have lead to the idea that a nuclear accident could endanger millions.  Hogwash!  The carbon dioxide emitted by coal fired power plants has done and will do far worse damage.



Yes, we (including France) can have and do have fool proof, safe nuclear power plants.  Yes, we can reprocess spent fuel rods to extend the life of uranium deposits which are plentiful.   Yes, we can store spent fuel rods safely and the Wast Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico is an example of how to do this.



Yes, we need to also use renewables such as hydroelectric, wind power and solar energy but with the recognition that they will never suffice to provide all the electric power the world needs and the world needs more electric power every day.



Finally, the best newspaper article I&#039;ve read in twenty years announced this spring that the Southern Company had applied for permission to construct two new nuclear steam generators in addition to its two existing 1215 megawatt units that have been on line near Waynesboro, Georgia since 1987.  Finally!  A bright, shining light in the gloom.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Early last spring I was walking through Barnes &amp; Noble and, on the spur of the moment, I picked up a copy of the book, &#8220;Power to Save the World  The Truth about Nuclear Power&#8221; by Gwyneth Cravens, published by Knopf with ISBN 978-0-307-26656-9.</p>
<p>This is a very careful and very interesting examination of the nuclear power industry starting with mining of uranium through power production to disposal of wastes.  I&#8217;ve read the darn book three times and am now starting a fourth and I would recommend it for the uninitiated.</p>
<p>The author, once a Long Island anti-nuclear activist who participated in efforts leading to the tragedy of the closing of the Shoreham plant by judicial decree before it produced a single watt of power, as a result of her study of the nuclear power cycle, is now a nuclear power supporter.</p>
<p>Other notes:  The nuclear power disasters at Chernobyl and Three Mile Island Unit Two incidents were vastly overplayed by a minimally competent, non-understanding media and have lead to the idea that a nuclear accident could endanger millions.  Hogwash!  The carbon dioxide emitted by coal fired power plants has done and will do far worse damage.</p>
<p>Yes, we (including France) can have and do have fool proof, safe nuclear power plants.  Yes, we can reprocess spent fuel rods to extend the life of uranium deposits which are plentiful.   Yes, we can store spent fuel rods safely and the Wast Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico is an example of how to do this.</p>
<p>Yes, we need to also use renewables such as hydroelectric, wind power and solar energy but with the recognition that they will never suffice to provide all the electric power the world needs and the world needs more electric power every day.</p>
<p>Finally, the best newspaper article I&#8217;ve read in twenty years announced this spring that the Southern Company had applied for permission to construct two new nuclear steam generators in addition to its two existing 1215 megawatt units that have been on line near Waynesboro, Georgia since 1987.  Finally!  A bright, shining light in the gloom.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ondrejch</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-282</link>
		<dc:creator>ondrejch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 May 2008 21:24:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/2008/05/18/does-nuclear-power-compete-with-conservation-wind-solar-and-biomass/#comment-282</guid>
		<description>solar charger&gt; Solar is not safer than nuclear. Wind for instance demonstrated that is is about 100x more dangerous than nuclear energy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>solar charger&gt; Solar is not safer than nuclear. Wind for instance demonstrated that is is about 100x more dangerous than nuclear energy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

