Rob Rogers for February 11, 2014

  1. Missing large
    Don Winchester Premium Member about 10 years ago

    I challenge any of you Lib nuts to go a week without using ANYTHING that requires fossil fuels. Oops….you already lost….your computer or smartphone requires electricity to recharge…

     •  Reply
  2. Barnette
    Enoki  about 10 years ago

    Yes, the US should by using natural gas as a interim fuel until we can build sufficient nuclear plants to become independent of coal and oil for electrical generation. We would then have the cheap electrical power to produce hydrogen for portable fuel and get off gasoline almost entirely...But not for the Progressive Left with their idiot ideas that sunshine, whirligigs, and choo choo trains will solve our energy problems.

     •  Reply
  3. Missing large
    archimedeslives  about 10 years ago

    try a little research there are 25 oil refineries in Canada. But don’t let the facts get in the way of a good rant

     •  Reply
  4. Missing large
    woodwork  about 10 years ago

    The nuclear plants scare me! How can the waste be stored safely? What about another Three Mile Island, or Chrenoble, or the event in Japan? Nuclar power is DANGEROUS!!!!

     •  Reply
  5. Lifi
    rossevrymn  about 10 years ago

    Wow! This is really not pertinent.

     •  Reply
  6. Barnette
    Enoki  about 10 years ago

    A blog?! Okay… Well, the Ronald Reagan (CVN) example is utter … That stuff. I was in the naval nuclear power program. There is no dosemetry records to back up the claims. There is no indication that radiation aboard the ship was higher than normally expected.Potable water as well as feed water is checked daily by the RLT’s (Reactor Lab Technicians) for radiation along with a large number of other things.Dosemetry is in place on the ship and all nuclear and plant operators wear personal dosemetry for all intents at all times aboard ship. The records are official and kept by dozens of different personnel. They would be difficult or impossible to forge or “lose.”So, the article starts with a vauge and incorrect supposition and then builds on that sort of vauge unsourced nonsense..One thing is correct in it: Cancer does not appear rapidly after low levels of exposure. If exposure were severe the problems caused by radiation would vastly outweigh the possiblity of cancer in any case.

     •  Reply
  7. 1107121618000
    CorosiveFrog Premium Member about 10 years ago

    There is really no clean way to make that much energy. There’s no getting away from it; we need to use less energy and recycle plastics.

    …but that’s not the american way…

     •  Reply
  8. Missing large
    Reality,really?  about 10 years ago

    Not viable in your lifetime. Or any lifetime.

     •  Reply
  9. Birthcontrol
    Dtroutma  about 10 years ago

    The real danger with nuclear: My son went to nuclear power school, we had a uranium mill in town in the early ’50’s and mines in the hills across the valley, years before we moved here, they were gone, he had the highest “background” radiation level in the class. A kid who lived his entire life just outside the fence of a nuclear power plant had among the LOWEST levels in the class!

    It’s the mining and processing that is most dangerous, not the actual operation of plants, or disposal of that wast, most of which is actually very low level garbage.

    Fossile fuels ARE a finite resource, and like it or not, there will come a day when options are no longer options.

     •  Reply
Sign in to comment

More From Rob Rogers