Sen. Barack Obama on nuclear power from SentinelSource.com
Loading...
Uploaded by SentinelSourceDotCom on Nov 27, 2007
Senator Barack Obama answers question on nuclear power from Opinion Page Editor Guy R. MacMillin and Managing Editor Paul Miller during a Keene Sentinel Editorial Board interview on Novemeber 25, 2007 at http://www.SentinelSource.com and http://www.NHElects.com as recorded by http://www.EventVideoTeam.com
- 18 likes, 5 dislikes
-
Link to this comment:
Top Comments
All Comments (35)
-
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!
-
global radioactive waste site near chernobyl, water-way access, create revenue that's much needed in area
-
how about a global radioactive waste site near chernobyl , waterway access , create revenue that's much needed in that area
-
Obama
-
Can someone please write the first sentence pronunced by MacMillan? "we're talking about regulation....?"
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
3 years ago 2
-
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
-
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.
- 3:28Bustice and Power Girl Save the Nuclear Power P...by AttackOfTheShow34,617 views
- 3:08Barack Obama's plan for NUCLEAR DISARMAMENTby AskObamaNow15,819 views
- 2:06NBC on Obama's nuclear weapons commentby Blm73018,274 views
- 1:24Sen. John McCain on nuclear energyby LCVheatison9,401 views
- 7:37Barack Obama Stuttering Uh Montageby alahatim155,143 views
- 0:17Senator Barack Obama Says Can't Take Nuclear Po...by 22099eresd125,006 views
- 57:17Fukushima Disaster Documentary: Is Nuclear Powe...by alphaspheric35,669 views
- 4:53Sen. Barack Obama on the dollar from SentinelSo...by SentinelSourceDotCom2,989 views
- 41:37Nuclear Power: Risks and Consequencesby linktv1,805 views
- 0:13Obama Nuclearby ObamaNuclear1,305 views
- 7:47Rep. Dennis Kucinich on Iraq from SentinelSourc...by SentinelSourceDotCom638 views
- 2:33Obama pushes nuclear power planby AlJazeeraEnglish9,462 views
- 7:14Rep. Dennis Kucinich on nuclear power from Sent...by SentinelSourceDotCom794 views
- 9:12Rep. Dennis Kucinich on subprime mortgages and ...by SentinelSourceDotCom458 views
- 4:53Nuclear Powerby GlobeWatch903,858 views
- 4:37How nuclear energy worksby ENECeducation301,494 views
- 0:17Obama on nuclear powerby F7a9j12351 views
- 0:13Sen. Barack Obama Says He Is Not A Nuclear Ener...by 09dkjasd903139 views
- 0:08Sen. Barack Obama on nuclear powerby 8Ikw924shore142 views
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.
staciejung 3 years ago 8
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.
rand98324 3 years ago 5