BP gusher to spew 2 billion barrels?

[Ricechex]

This is very scary indeed. It is a catastrophe, much worse than anything we have seen in the past.

I have suspected since the start that they were lying about the true amount of oil devouring the Gulf. Yes, they will nuke it. (any Michael Ruppert readers? He states that Obama “knows” that they will nuke it, because Obama stated that this will be contained by 90% by August. What politician makes such claims if there was not anything on the table?) It will become a huge toxic dump, devoid of life. On a very small scale, look what happenned to the Salton Sea.

This has far reaching complications that will threaten our way of life. What happens when the Gulf states residents move to the East and Midwest? What happens if the hurricanes blow the oil far enough to cover the Midwest farmland is oil and chemicals and kill the crops? Remember the dust bowl? It was not until a black cloud of dirt blew over Chicago that anyone paid any attention. And, even then, they could not fix that problem…the land was already demolished, and to this day has not recovered.

Partypup: I am with you in stocking up on canned goods. But that is only a bandaid. It gives me little sense of safety in the long run.

Concho: agreed that those were indeed scares, but this in fact is real…we can see it and the effects. The sea life and mammals are canaries in the coal mine and an unfortunate foreshadowing of what is to come.

[KSMountain]

[quote=afx114]If you missed The Daily Show last night, be sure to check out Jon Stewart discussing the last eight presidents who have gone on television and promised to move America towards an energy-independent future.

It’s so pathetic that it was hard to laugh.[/quote]

Agreed. Pathetic. Sorry if this is a threadjack but I really think we should resume building nuclear plants. Use that for most of our electrical generation and use fossil fuels for applications that have to have it – e.g. aviation/trucking.

In the *overall* calculation of risk/reward/danger/environmental damage, it seems to me Nuclear fares pretty well compared to other energy sources, once you get past the “oooh it’s mysterious and scary” mindset.

[KSMountain]

[quote=afx114]If you missed The Daily Show last night, be sure to check out Jon Stewart discussing the last eight presidents who have gone on television and promised to move America towards an energy-independent future.

It’s so pathetic that it was hard to laugh.[/quote]

Agreed. Pathetic. Sorry if this is a threadjack but I really think we should resume building nuclear plants. Use that for most of our electrical generation and use fossil fuels for applications that have to have it – e.g. aviation/trucking.

In the *overall* calculation of risk/reward/danger/environmental damage, it seems to me Nuclear fares pretty well compared to other energy sources, once you get past the “oooh it’s mysterious and scary” mindset.

[KSMountain]

[quote=afx114]If you missed The Daily Show last night, be sure to check out Jon Stewart discussing the last eight presidents who have gone on television and promised to move America towards an energy-independent future.

It’s so pathetic that it was hard to laugh.[/quote]

Agreed. Pathetic. Sorry if this is a threadjack but I really think we should resume building nuclear plants. Use that for most of our electrical generation and use fossil fuels for applications that have to have it – e.g. aviation/trucking.

In the *overall* calculation of risk/reward/danger/environmental damage, it seems to me Nuclear fares pretty well compared to other energy sources, once you get past the “oooh it’s mysterious and scary” mindset.

[KSMountain]

[quote=afx114]If you missed The Daily Show last night, be sure to check out Jon Stewart discussing the last eight presidents who have gone on television and promised to move America towards an energy-independent future.

It’s so pathetic that it was hard to laugh.[/quote]

Agreed. Pathetic. Sorry if this is a threadjack but I really think we should resume building nuclear plants. Use that for most of our electrical generation and use fossil fuels for applications that have to have it – e.g. aviation/trucking.

In the *overall* calculation of risk/reward/danger/environmental damage, it seems to me Nuclear fares pretty well compared to other energy sources, once you get past the “oooh it’s mysterious and scary” mindset.

[KSMountain]

[quote=afx114]If you missed The Daily Show last night, be sure to check out Jon Stewart discussing the last eight presidents who have gone on television and promised to move America towards an energy-independent future.

It’s so pathetic that it was hard to laugh.[/quote]

Agreed. Pathetic. Sorry if this is a threadjack but I really think we should resume building nuclear plants. Use that for most of our electrical generation and use fossil fuels for applications that have to have it – e.g. aviation/trucking.

In the *overall* calculation of risk/reward/danger/environmental damage, it seems to me Nuclear fares pretty well compared to other energy sources, once you get past the “oooh it’s mysterious and scary” mindset.

[scaredyclassic]

im with nuclear. on the whole, everything’s risky, but things work out ok for the simpsons in springfield, and we’ll at least be able to breathe the air and eat fish.

[scaredyclassic]

im with nuclear. on the whole, everything’s risky, but things work out ok for the simpsons in springfield, and we’ll at least be able to breathe the air and eat fish.

[scaredyclassic]

im with nuclear. on the whole, everything’s risky, but things work out ok for the simpsons in springfield, and we’ll at least be able to breathe the air and eat fish.

[scaredyclassic]

im with nuclear. on the whole, everything’s risky, but things work out ok for the simpsons in springfield, and we’ll at least be able to breathe the air and eat fish.

[scaredyclassic]

im with nuclear. on the whole, everything’s risky, but things work out ok for the simpsons in springfield, and we’ll at least be able to breathe the air and eat fish.

[Hobie]

[quote=KSMountain]I really think we should resume building nuclear plants. Use that for most of our electrical generation and use fossil fuels for applications that have to have it – e.g. aviation/trucking.
[/quote]

+100%

The biggest problem is educating folks about the safety of the technology. Why hasn’t the nuke industry done this? Same with the Energy Department, oh yeah they are not in the business of creating energy.

[Hobie]

[quote=KSMountain]I really think we should resume building nuclear plants. Use that for most of our electrical generation and use fossil fuels for applications that have to have it – e.g. aviation/trucking.
[/quote]

+100%

The biggest problem is educating folks about the safety of the technology. Why hasn’t the nuke industry done this? Same with the Energy Department, oh yeah they are not in the business of creating energy.

[Hobie]

[quote=KSMountain]I really think we should resume building nuclear plants. Use that for most of our electrical generation and use fossil fuels for applications that have to have it – e.g. aviation/trucking.
[/quote]

+100%

The biggest problem is educating folks about the safety of the technology. Why hasn’t the nuke industry done this? Same with the Energy Department, oh yeah they are not in the business of creating energy.

[Hobie]

[quote=KSMountain]I really think we should resume building nuclear plants. Use that for most of our electrical generation and use fossil fuels for applications that have to have it – e.g. aviation/trucking.
[/quote]

+100%

The biggest problem is educating folks about the safety of the technology. Why hasn’t the nuke industry done this? Same with the Energy Department, oh yeah they are not in the business of creating energy.

[Author]

Posts