foisted by dumb ass anti-nuke fossil fuel apologists here.
The little whiny anti-nuke brats are an arbitrary bunch of cretins, who like to criticize
nuclear energy on the grounds that they don't apply to their own little "lipstick on a pig" schemes for maintaining the fossil fuel status quo while claiming they're really for stuff like wind and solar which are no where near as reliable as nuclear plants, not as safe, not as clean and cannot be built quickly no matter how much hype they dispense
As I pointed out elsewhere, the average lifetime of a wind plant is, um, 15 years in the dangerous fossil fuel Kingdom of Denmark,
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/12/28/185825/42/388/677953">The Operational Lifetime of Wind Turbines in Denmark: Government Data.
Now, it's not like the little whiny anti-nuke fossil fuel shills who come here to pretend that wind can save the world - they've been saying that shit for year after year after year after year after year right here at E&E and they don't give a fuck that essentially
nothing has happened and 100's of billions of tons of dangerous fossil fuel waste have been dumped in the atmosphere while they whine and whine and whine and whine and whine trying to save the world for Gazprom.
The fact is that the infrastructure they are trying to destroy in my state with ignorance, the Oyster Creek nuclear plant, produces more
energy in one small reactor than all the greasy windmills in Denmark as I pointed out in
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/12/29/12649/267">More Fun With Danish Energy Agency Data: A Diary About Me that reactor produces roughly as much energy as the entire Danish wind program.
And with no deference to stupid whiny anti-nukes whatsoever, dangerous fossil fuel apologist all, let's be clear what Denmark is all about by looking what they put on the front page of their Energy Agency Website:
http://www.ens.dk/sw11492.asp">Spotlight on Denmark's oil and gas production 2007