Sen. Barack Obama on nuclear power from SentinelSource.com

[ImOfNope]

What in gods name is this fuck'n guy doing? He just kicked environmentalist's and the rest of our environment in the gut, now that he's going to sign a pact with the devil (republicans) and have 100 more nuclear plants built in the next 20 years!! What this means is, they'll be digging up more national parks and sacred lands to get the uranium! What the hell is Obama doing?!! Is he doing this just so he can get the health care bill passed?? Fuck' the bill!! WTF!

[blackle4ps3]

global radioactive waste site near chernobyl, water-way access, create revenue that's much needed in area

[blackle4ps3]

how about a global radioactive waste site near chernobyl , waterway access , create revenue that's much needed in that area

[clairebreedlove26]

Obama

[Brumicchia]

Can someone please write the first sentence pronunced by MacMillan? "we're talking about regulation....?"

[Yoruyonaka]

Beyond it being undeniably best for the environment, however, with its ability to make mass transportation so cheap that burning fuels for travel is economically unsound, EXPANSION is the only way to solve our economic woes. Economists now are proposing making us all slowly poorer to keep us from collapsing. Electricity equals labor and production, it equals wealth and jobs. By opening the doors once more for new plants we could solve problems like redistributing wealth never will.

[Yoruyonaka]

Please people, PLEASE do some actual research on nuclear and call your representatives. It's the court delays that make it take long and rise interest to several times the cost of the plant. Nuclear is CHEAP, the fuel is practically inexaustable, and it can easily be made completely non polluting. Nuclear fuel reprocessing is a MUST. Oil lobbies pay for the laws against nuclear, ppl.  They pay the enviromental lawyers who sue the plants. Nuclear and mass tans means no more oil.

[Yoruyonaka]

What a bunch of buffoons. Nuclear is ALREADY safe. Nuclear produces very little waste. You can burn it and reprocess it over and over again until there's almost nothing left but energy and useful isotopes (stuff we'd export for big money), NO nuclear bomb material left (you burn it all) and you anti nuclear ppl have forced us into a situation where we just burn it once and bury it! It's cheaper to reprocess the stuff for energy than to mine and process the FIRST time.

[KohnanTB]

The real reason why Yucca Mountain won't happen is because we don't need it. If we resume reprocessing the spent fuel, we get even more energy out of the process. Additionally, if we transition to Thorium (LFTR), there is even less spent fuel to deal with and almost no transuranics. The biggest problem nuclear faces is not any kind of operational risk; it's that "the next big thing" is always around the corner. Investors are nervous about committing to one idea when a better might be ready soon.

[healtheplanetfirst]

I can see that Chernobyl was not enough a lesson Mr. Obama. Perhaps is human nature to make the same mistake over and over. Consider though that Chernobyl could have wiped out most of Europe -- they were just lucky. Do you want that lesson in our land Mr Obama, so we can learn? By the way, fortunately we live in such peaceful times that there is no terrorism that could target a nuclear reactor, right Mr. Obama? We have many safe energy sources to choose from if we really commit to them.

[staciejung]

You don't know anything about nuclear power or what happened at Chernobyl. Chernobyl was a cheeply built plant with not internal containment. It was run by idiots who turned off all the existing safety systems in the plant and then decided to cause a runaway reaction in the rods. That would never happen at any power plant in the US. There are too many standards and safegards in place.

[mcj08usna]

Well stated staciejung. Do ANY US reactors use graphite as a moderator?

[AeroDan7748]

As far as I know the only US reactors that use graphite as a moderator are a few experimental reactors. Anyways, healtheplanetfirst's comment sort of illustrates the public's misconception about nuclear power. Nuclear power has HUGE potential in supplying our future energy needs over any other source! If done right, it could prove to be safe, cheap, reliable, and environmentally friendly for the asshole up there ^^^ (!)

[bocckoka]

Other than emitting much more CO2 a coal plant pollutes the enviroment with much more radioactivity too, because there are isotopes in the coal mined, which is drilled, burnt and spread out by a high chimney. Cheers

[sand517]

Exelon is one of Obama's biggest donors. This is why he supports nuclear energy, not because he supports nuclear energy. AIG, Goldman-Sachs, JP Morgan, and Citigroup are his other big donors. This is not change, but the same, for the corporation and not the people because he also voted for the bailout. His bailout vote gives nothing to the taxpayers who are supporting it. In the debates 2008 he supports nuclear power, since that is a donor of his campaign.

Vote Nader '08 No Nuclear Power!!

[nmone84]

That agnostic comment is a direct rip off of Hilary Clinton's stance. 7/23/07 debate - see for yourself.

[waterforpeople]

What a phony. Just like McCain.

[AmericanOriginal1]

He's "agnostic" about Nuclear Power (@ 3:50).

...This is a byword for "I'm NOT giving you a straight answer".

[jasbcor]

Was he trying to be funny with his last comment? I sincerely hope not as it would invalidate any of his concerns before hand as being ignorant ramblings.

[joshfarc]

No way, extreme rightists bashing the left? Mccain has never made up a story or said something someone wrote for him......hahaha...keep thinking McCain graduated at the top of his class. Keep it up, you might be a politician one day....

[nicholasxchaotic]

nice to hear him say hes 'agnostic' on nuclear power @ approx 3:50 in. interesting... isnt that what hilary said a few months previous in the debate? watch the video 'what is your stance on nuclear power'.

no original thought at all. no coherent meaning to what he says. and when he says anything that half makes sense... hes stolen from another candidate. way to go democratic party. you sure picked a jewel. lmfao.

[Brimshae]

Wow, I've never seen anyone talk for so long and say absolutely nothing. Thank you.

[GoldSkywalkern]

Welcome to the world of politicians, Brimshae.

[AnnieGetYourGang]

I grew up in a town centered around a naval shipyard. Bremerton, Washington centered around PSNS (the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard). It's the first entry point for nuclear waste entering the country, after nuclear accidents in Japan, these days, and PSNS employees service the Trident nuclear submarines mounted with Trident nuclear warheads. Three kid within a few blocks of me died of cancer before they were 30; 2 of my own brothers got cancer before they were 40 and I stopped taking tests.

[Tank1der]

I'm in the navy, and I deal with nuclear power on CVN and Subs...its funny everyone says its so unsafe but the Navy has run on nuclear power for almost 50 years with no problems..as long as people are trained on it.. and follow procedures then they should be fine..

[126altf4]

Obviously he doesn't know much AT ALL about nuclear power, how it works and what the options are, that is for nuclear designs. I'm not just saying this randomly, I do know a lot about it.

[MamaMia4545]

He's a total idiot. Only idiots will vote for idiots. He will ruin this country. Drill here.  Drill NOW!

[Louis13232]

You're the idiot because if you were smart you would realize that drilling now would deplete the US from natural resources that could be used later on when prices are higher

[alphasimian]

What a clear and balanced take on nuclear power. I just feel more and more support for Obama the more I hear from him.

[lwnf360]

Its not fair to lay the blame on the last 7 years of the Bush administration. The problem of regulatory oversight in general (as he said FCC FDA NRC EPA) goes back at least 20 years. It is time to slim the agencies down and revamp their mission--the independent protection of the public by regulation of private industry.

[Breenius]

Obama's statement near the end that we worry the plant might "blow up and radiate us and kill us" really shows that he's not very well informed on the issue. In fact, I think its hard to find any politician who is truly informed on the issue, republican or democrat.

[UtahPirate]

I find his statement at the end to be tongue-in-cheek, and not a reflection on whether or not he's really informed or not.

I think informing politicians about the real story on the issues is the only way to get them informed. If all we do is complain about how they're ill-informed, then what we ultimately do is to shoot ourselves in the foot.

[UtahPirate]

Personally, I found Obama's statement at the end to be more tongue-in-cheek (thus the laughter of the others, and his smirk), and not reflecting his being informed or not.

His mention of Yucca Mountain being unsuitable does show that he is well-informed.

[rand98324]

Yes, he's spot on about Yucca Mountain.

I'm very pro-nuclear but like anyone who understands the issue, I agree that Yucca Mountain is just plain dumb stupid. It's politically stupid. It's technically stupid. It's the wrong place for the wrong mission using the wrong methods.

The future of spent fuel is reprocessing. You get more energy out of it and the 2 or 3% of the spent fuel which is truly ultimate waste become much easier to manage than whole fuel rods.

[jasbcor]

I agree with you, however the Nuclear Waste Policy Act that legal obligates Yucca Mountain to do its mission. The law needs to change in order for a more sensible course to take place.