Shared publicly  - 
Today's news from Sen. Bernie Sanders:
Vermont Yankee: More than 1,000 people converged Saturday on Brattleboro Common demanding closure of the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant. "The future of energy isn't nuclear power or fossil fuels; it's energy efficiency," Sanders told the Brattleboro Reformer prior to his speech.

Nuclear Corporate: Welfare "Many in Congress talk of getting big government off the back of private industry. Here's an industry we'd like to get off the backs of the taxpayers," Sen Sanders and Taxpayers for Common Sense President Ryan Alexander wrote in a column Monday on The Huffington Post.

Solar Power: Sen. Sanders addressed an energy fair in Waterbury. "What we're talking about it trying to save the planet by cutting back on greenhouse gas emissions, saving consumers on their fuel bills, and creating the jobs that our communities need," Sanders said in an ABC 22 report aired Monday morning.

Read the full news here:
April 16, 2012. Senator Sanders. Vermont Yankee More than 1000 people converged Saturday on Brattleboro Common demanding closure of the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant. "The future of energy i...
Scott Munro's profile photoKeith Padgett's profile photoBrian Holmes's profile photoAnthony DeTommasi's profile photo
The future of energy is living in the dark like North Korea. Wonderful! This guy thinks The Hunger Games is a Utopia!
Nuclear power is death and destruction to our planet and lives. There are so many countries that use solar and wind power that are having no problems getting energy to supply all their demands. Why can't our country become more advanced in this area?
Property rights...the privilege of extracting all that is valuable from part of the planet to profit selfishly. It seems that if a corporation can destroy land permanently for limited gain simply by claiming the 'right' to do so we don't have long until cockroaches are the dominant species on earth. Personally I would rather live a cold and dark existence than know my temporary comfort will cost the lives of countless generations.
+Keith Padgett Please name me one country that gets ANY appreciable supply of energy from Solar and Wind?
+Brian Holmes typed on a device that HE owns to make this point. Such a device would never be designed and built without the opportunity to "Selfishly" Profit. I am sure North Korea would let you immigrate!
Many countries are using and trying to implement more operations into their programs. As of right now, there are none that depend mostly on renewable sources, but are working to get to this point. Brazil, China, Spain, Germany, and the United States of America are the leading users of renewable energy. Spain's main source of generated electricity is from wind.
The reality of the ongoing Fukishima disaster still weighs heavy on myself and those around me. The temporary profit of money and power for Japan is now washing up irradiated on my shores and falling with the rain. The 'fallout' on an unsuspecting and uninformed population is criminal and sociopathic. Anti-nuclear does not equal socialist or communist. Visit Fukishima province Scott!
Glad my thoughts were fully detailed in the prior thread, responding to similar though slightly less histrionic nonsense.
Zombies, go back to whatever it is you eat +Scott Munro I single you out as a worthless contributor.
+Scott Munro 100 years ago your philosophical ancestors were saying "If god had wanted men to fly he'd have given them wings".

Humans will learn to make enough renewable energy for our needs because we have to. The alternative is to let nature eventually cut down on the number of humans. I think we would all (except maybe the crazy "Come, Apocalypse" cultists) rather avoid that.

But where will those innovative humans be allowed to florish first? Folks like you make it less likely every day that the answer will be "America".
+Roger Glover wrong! I am all for innovation in energy markets. Government will only create stasis in this market. Please read the link above.
This is one area where the left can tend to be unrealistic as to practical realities...and nuclear is indeed the "methadone" we need to rely on to get ourselves unhooked from the massively more damaging fossil fuels. More damaging as to pollution, human health, environmental health and redirection of US monies to foreign economies.
Why do we need to build more nuclear plants? That is a foolish and potentially dangerous project. There are no safe nuclear plants and there is no reason we can't develop better renwable energy plants. It is going to take time, but it is a lot better than relying on fossil fuels and a dangerous nuclear plant.
I would welcome a wind farm on my property over radiation any day, how would you like to store spent rods on YOUR property +Scott Munro ??
I prefer the rods to a pro rata amount of coal pollution resulting from generating an equivalent amount of energy from each. 2000 tons of carefully controlled radioactive waste vs. 690 million tons of carbon freely released to the air from coal in 2008 for 30% of electricity acid rain, mercury, smog.... Coal is the killer...not orders of magnitude.
Scott Munro, I would have no problem with that. This country has more than enough open land to be able to set up wind farms in every state and close to every city. Why don't you go to North Korea like you are preaching and live there. We want what is best for our country and our world. All this contamination is killing us and the earth. Unless you plan on joining Newt on a city on the moon?
You have a great point +Anthony DeTommasi ,you didn't mention the impact on the ground and in the waters from our mining and mountaintop destruction. The tar sands are another example of destruction for temporary comfort. As long as we rationalize the necessity of our self destructive paradigm over what we know to be reality we can't move forward.
And acid rain can be stopped and the effects negated over a short period of time, nuclear is not so forgiving.
Meh...the Adirondacks recovery from acid rain and mercury has been greatly exaggerated, unfortunately...and yes you are correct, I was only scratching the surface of salient harms from fossil fuels as a whole.
Add a comment...