SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (252301)12/25/2007 3:30:59 PM
From: Bearcatbob  Read Replies (2) of 281500
 
Nadine - $150 billion sounds like a lot - but it is not. I all depends on one's time frame. Let us look at some numbers. First, I believe sequestration is a pipe dream. That leads to uses of alternate energy processes. So - how much does a nuclear power plant cost? Lets say 1000 MW at $10 billion each? $150 billion would get you 15 plants a year in the US - if you could design and build them. It would take time to get this in place - but say by 2015 th plan is in place - the first plants could come on in say 2020 and presto - in another 30 years or so the CO2 problem is solved.

Now - if there is another way - someone tell me.

Oh yeah - Germany has signed Kyoto and is shutting down its nukes - lol! Seems like the radical greens are the biggest barrier to solving the problem.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News