Comments on: An Idaho Congressman’s views on the American Clean Energy and Security Act http://www.bobpearcy.com/an-idaho-congressmans-views-on-the-american-clean-energy-and-security-act/ The World Around Us Mon, 12 Dec 2011 15:03:51 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: JK http://www.bobpearcy.com/an-idaho-congressmans-views-on-the-american-clean-energy-and-security-act/comment-page-1/#comment-46 JK Wed, 01 Jul 2009 00:25:41 +0000 http://www.bobpearcy.com/?p=190#comment-46 Dear Prometheuspan, Renewable may be a technically narrow field, but nuclear today can reduce greenhouse emissions in a massive way. Renewables can't. Nuclear can be recycled to reuse and consume most of the fuel, just like renewables. It can even make more fuel than you started with -- again unlike renewables. You say the math supports renewables over nuclear, so okay show us your math. Facts are facts, and nuclear energy provides 20% of our country's electricity (and 90% of France's), TODAY, is a fact. Not any of the most optimistic renewables studies even dares predict those numbers, which is why renewables must continue to depend on CARBON fuels to back them up. Face it, we could go back to the poor, farm with horses, ride bicycles, sail our cargo ships across the ocean powered by wind -- like we did a hundred years ago, and many of us would starve. Yes, starve. So what are the choices? Show us your numbers! JK Dear Prometheuspan,

Renewable may be a technically narrow field, but nuclear today can reduce greenhouse emissions in a massive way. Renewables can’t. Nuclear can be recycled to reuse and consume most of the fuel, just like renewables. It can even make more fuel than you started with — again unlike renewables.

You say the math supports renewables over nuclear, so okay show us your math. Facts are facts, and nuclear energy provides 20% of our country’s electricity (and 90% of France’s), TODAY, is a fact. Not any of the most optimistic renewables studies even dares predict those numbers, which is why renewables must continue to depend on CARBON fuels to back them up.

Face it, we could go back to the poor, farm with horses, ride bicycles, sail our cargo ships across the ocean powered by wind — like we did a hundred years ago, and many of us would starve. Yes, starve. So what are the choices? Show us your numbers!

JK

]]> By: prometheuspan http://www.bobpearcy.com/an-idaho-congressmans-views-on-the-american-clean-energy-and-security-act/comment-page-1/#comment-37 prometheuspan Sun, 28 Jun 2009 09:13:43 +0000 http://www.bobpearcy.com/?p=190#comment-37 "renewable sources” for the RES to exclude hydropower and nuclear energy." neither of those resources are renewable. " U.S. industries will be unable to compete on the world stage and American jobs will be forced overseas. " On the contrary, moving into the future will create real progress in many ways you obviously don't forsee, and thus impart economic advantages you don't anticipate, most importantly, renewable energy is simply cheaper by orders of magnitude when the math compares long term instead of short term investments. "I believe that to do so we must look at all the options, including renewable energy, nuclear energy, and domestic oil production." You should get a nice education on the facts, and not run with mere beliefs. A simple science based cost/benefit analysis for long term instead of artificially constricted short term demonstrates that any kind of fossil fuels is not only not green or renewable, but also expensive and primitive. "and increasing production of American energy through nuclear energy production" Nuclear energy is not green, not renewable, and for domestic use, not sane. Your arguments betray ignorance of the facts, you are not serving the public with such, instead, you are serving the nuclear power industry. “renewable sources” for the RES to exclude hydropower and nuclear energy.” neither of those resources are renewable.
” U.S. industries will be unable to compete on the world stage and American jobs will be forced overseas. ”
On the contrary, moving into the future will create real progress in many ways you obviously don’t forsee, and thus impart economic advantages you don’t anticipate, most importantly, renewable energy is simply cheaper by orders of magnitude when the math compares long term instead of short term investments.
“I believe that to do so we must look at all the options, including renewable energy, nuclear energy, and domestic oil production.”
You should get a nice education on the facts, and not run with mere beliefs. A simple science based cost/benefit analysis for long term instead of artificially constricted short term demonstrates that any kind of fossil fuels is not only not green or renewable, but also expensive and primitive.
“and increasing production of American energy through nuclear energy production”
Nuclear energy is not green, not renewable, and for domestic use, not sane. Your arguments betray ignorance of the facts, you are not serving the public with such, instead, you are serving the nuclear power industry.

]]>