You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #14: Rather than billions thrown at the meltdown-style nuke plant builders, why not Pebble Bed reactors? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
kysrsoze Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-31-10 10:59 AM
Response to Original message
14. Rather than billions thrown at the meltdown-style nuke plant builders, why not Pebble Bed reactors?
There are other options too. Why do we have to rely on the same old ridiculously expensive, extremely flawed designs of the past? While we're at it, the announcement also mentioned "clean" coal again. Now THAT is a farce. Where/how are we going to store all that CO2?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -WTF is UP with Obama? New Nuke Subsidies and Offshore Oil Drilling? Liberation Angel  Mar-31-10 10:16 AM   #0 
  - Hate to break it to you but PEOPLE need and use energy  NJmaverick   Mar-31-10 10:18 AM   #1 
  - Not to speak for the person...  Oregone   Mar-31-10 10:42 AM   #7 
  - No blood for oil is the progressive energy policy  stray cat   Mar-31-10 11:17 AM   #21 
     - I think that is a talking point, which isn't customary of "progressive thought"  Oregone   Mar-31-10 01:18 PM   #33 
  - Deleted sub-thread  Name removed   Mar-31-10 10:56 AM   #12 
  - Not enough audacity to promote conservation, just alternatives.  Captain Hilts   Mar-31-10 10:20 AM   #2 
  - That is so completely untrue  sandnsea   Mar-31-10 10:50 AM   #11 
  - My point is that the subsidies should be for renewables and not nukes/offshore oil  Liberation Angel   Mar-31-10 11:00 AM   #15 
  - He has discussed conservation before. Maybe you missed that part.  ncteechur   Mar-31-10 07:44 PM   #52 
  - Thanks for the link, I just voted pro-nuke  Godhumor   Mar-31-10 10:29 AM   #3 
  - S'okay  Liberation Angel   Mar-31-10 11:13 AM   #17 
  - He is doing a balancing act.  tabatha   Mar-31-10 10:29 AM   #4 
  - And typically 80% of DU is completely ignoring what he's saying.  tridim   Mar-31-10 10:40 AM   #5 
  - I'm not's the "drill baby drills" who are  Cha   Mar-31-10 01:26 PM   #36 
  - This proves oil isn't the solution  sandnsea   Mar-31-10 10:45 AM   #8 
  - Some people don't seem to get that we need a bridge between now and renewables  high density   Mar-31-10 10:49 AM   #10 
     - Nuclear can't be a bridge between now and renewables  bananas   Mar-31-10 01:58 PM   #39 
  - You're losing in your poll, and 62% of the public is behind Obama on nukes  BeyondGeography   Mar-31-10 10:41 AM   #6 
  - Is the existence of nuke energy in France proof its cheaper & cleaner than green energy?  Oregone   Mar-31-10 10:45 AM   #9 
  - France's nukes are a boondoggle" dangerous, expensive and inefficient  Liberation Angel   Mar-31-10 10:57 AM   #13 
  - So you think Dems support nukes?  kristopher   Mar-31-10 11:22 AM   #22 
     - Interesting poll.  Enthusiast   Mar-31-10 11:37 AM   #25 
  - Rather than billions thrown at the meltdown-style nuke plant builders, why not Pebble Bed reactors?  kysrsoze   Mar-31-10 10:59 AM   #14 
  - Traveling Wave, even better  midnight armadillo   Mar-31-10 11:15 AM   #18 
  - I'm personally a fan of the thorium fuel cycle, say a thorium-fluoride reactor.  backscatter712   Mar-31-10 05:12 PM   #45 
  - Because Pebble Bed reactors don't work  bananas   Mar-31-10 11:24 AM   #24 
     - Thanks for the link. Guess we'll have to see where Traveling Wave goes?  kysrsoze   Mar-31-10 11:41 AM   #26 
        - No, we don't have to wait for vaporware  bananas   Mar-31-10 02:25 PM   #42 
  - The tens of billions promoting renewables were in the stimulus.  Scarsdale Vibe   Mar-31-10 11:03 AM   #16 
  - Maybe - but supporting nukes and offshore drilling is regressive and foolish  Liberation Angel   Mar-31-10 11:16 AM   #19 
  - In terms of nuclear power - didn't you ever listen to anything Obama said?  stray cat   Mar-31-10 11:16 AM   #20 
  - I agree, it's beyond sad ...  ShortnFiery   Mar-31-10 11:24 AM   #23 
  - It's disappointing  eleny   Mar-31-10 11:59 AM   #27 
  - Where are the multibillion dollar subsidies for.... Proves you're a whiner.  tranche   Mar-31-10 12:03 PM   #28 
  - Wasting subsidies on nukes wastes money which could be used for renewables  Liberation Angel   Mar-31-10 02:01 PM   #40 
  - It is completely illogical to say reduce carbon emissions one place and increase them another.  DuaneBidoux   Mar-31-10 12:04 PM   #29 
  - Nuclear is a thrid rate solution for ending carbon emissions  kristopher   Mar-31-10 12:10 PM   #30 
  - We're sending the nuclear waste back in time? AWESOME!  JVS   Mar-31-10 12:16 PM   #32 
  - You have a point--although if we did do that we'd have to sit in our own shit.  DuaneBidoux   Mar-31-10 05:15 PM   #46 
  - But what massive carbon footprint will there be protecting nuke waste for 250,000 years?  Liberation Angel   Mar-31-10 01:55 PM   #38 
     - Agreed. And think what message we could leave those generations thousands of years out  DuaneBidoux   Mar-31-10 05:18 PM   #47 
  - I support the development of Nuclear Energy, but only in the framework of a non-private system.  JVS   Mar-31-10 12:16 PM   #31 
  - Nuclear energy..I'm so-so. Off-shore drilling I'm against, COMPLETELY. n/t  vaberella   Mar-31-10 01:20 PM   #34 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Mar-31-10 01:24 PM   #35 
  - He sure keeps his promises  tedk_355   Mar-31-10 01:43 PM   #37 
  - what promises?  Liberation Angel   Mar-31-10 02:02 PM   #41 
  - Yes, he did  NHDEMFORLIFE   Mar-31-10 04:23 PM   #44 
  - You're not doing it right.  ChimpersMcSmirkers   Mar-31-10 05:55 PM   #49 
  - I AM TOO!  jillan   Mar-31-10 04:06 PM   #43 
  - There supposedly is money for renewables - just as there was  karynnj   Mar-31-10 05:47 PM   #48 
  - thumbs up for 21st Century Nuclear energy... nt  greencharlie   Mar-31-10 06:15 PM   #50 
  - Nuclear energy is carbon neutral and off shoring drilling increases energy indedence  gravity   Mar-31-10 06:22 PM   #51 
     - Nothing carbon neutral about having to guard the nuke waste for 250,000 years  Liberation Angel   Mar-31-10 08:55 PM   #53 

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC