Wednesday, June 30, 2010

A Never-Ending Fount Of Wisdom

Found, yet again, on the editorial page of today's paper:

"...[I]t's hard to think of a more dramatic example of foreign oil dependency than BP and the great Gulf of Mexico disaster."

The tangled words of uber-sinister Leftie Dan Carpenter, of course, the same bold, brave fellow who boasts of mouse-trapping a woman from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce: when she decried cap-and-trade for the dire effect it would have on everyone's energy bills, then mentioned nuclear power as a possible alternative to conventional sources were it not for the huge cost of building 'em, clever Dan told her, "Talk about electric bills." Then, he tells us, she changed the subject.

Yeah, bet she did, havin' realized you're an ijit: nuke plants cost like bejeezus because of the regulatory burdens and huge legal expense of dealing with addlepated lawsuits from the freeze-in-mud-huts-in-the-dark crowd. It's a very similar can'o'worms to the one that cap & trade would open up -- and it all exposes your agenda, Dan: you'd love to see everyone freeze in the dark...well, everyone except for you and the rest of the ruling elite of which you believe yourself to be a part.

Don't count on it. There's plenty of room under the bus and they don't even slow down for a local newspaper columnist. When presshack lobbyists from the U. S. Chamber of Commerce have given up on you, you have reached a whole new level of irrelevance.

6 comments:

Ken said...

I read "local newspaper communist."

Mr.B said...

Wereit not for the kooky far left enviro-Nazis, we'd likely have already had enough Nuke plants to greatly reduce our carbon ouotput from coal.

reflectoscope said...

You'd think fusion research would be national make-it-go priority 0; if there was electricity to piss away then plug-in and hydrogen fuel-cell cars could actually be useful. Imagine that.

</ot>

Jim

Standard Mischief said...

Nuke power is cheapest. period.

That includes figuring in the tax that's been collected called the "Nuclear Waste Trust Fund" that was designed to build Yucca Mountain. (Never mind that we ought to be recycling the "waste" instead of trying to bury it)

Hat Trick said...

The newest generation technologies that are smaller scale, relatively cheap to build and self-limiting are inherently safe. You will never see a meltdown like the one at Three Mile Island. The biggest problem with them is how to protect them from terrorists trying to steal the fuel for dirty bombs.

On the subject of fuel reprocessing, the nuclear non-proliferation treaties dealt that away. There is a shuttered fuel reprocessing facility next to Dresden Power Station that had to be mothballed as soon as it was built. Never got to begin reprocessing spent fuel.

Hat Trick said...

Correction: The Three Mile Accident wasn't a meltdown in the sense used by the hysterical media. 2/3 of the reactor core melted to slag in the reactor vessel. The reactor vessel was not breached.