Quote Originally Posted by andruejaysin
cnn needs more raving lunatics.
they already have one: Glen beck, what a sucker... i mean i rather tune into Oreilys factor than even hear this guy's name... fake copycat!

Quote Originally Posted by dragonrider
Then I went through a time of opposing it, because the waste is extremetly difficult to deal with, and it remains deadly for far longer than human civilization has existed so far. Also, the potential for a truely disasterous accident that kills hundreds of thousands of people and poisons massive areas of land for thousands of years is very real.

If they could find a good way to deal with the waste and make the plants safe from accident, sabotage, terrorism, and war, I would be in favor of nuclear again. It is definitely a highly efficient form of power generation. And the waste is in a solid form that can be processed or stored, not like coal, gas, or oil that produce exhaust that goes into the atmosphere.
here is an idea, we have made all this technology of missiles and shuttles and what not... how come we cant find a 100% secure missile that can just shoot these dangerous wastes towards the sun? or any other safe/absorbing location in the universe...

i know i know it will be expensive, but come on... almost all those countries producing nuclear waste, have decent space/missile technologies as well. why cant the capital be spent to find a secure method to have a garbage shoot into space... it only needs political will! money is there, technology is there! and we can even make a big buck as a country to sell such technology or to have it performed for other nations.