View from the Center and Left Message Board

STOCKTALK

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 : View from the Center and Left

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Sam who wrote (64107)	5/7/2008 1:38:59 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) of 543175

Assume Romm is 100% correct about it requiring 700 new power plants (over multiple decades) Even with that assumption "The French are able to generate 80% of their electricity with nuclear power", doesn't equal "McCain calls for 700+ new power plants". They are not in anyway equivilent. Most importantly - "There is no reason we can't do X", isn't "We should do X" or "I call for X to happen" Also - "We should do X", assuming that X would require Y, still isn't the same as calling for Y. If I called for putting a man on Mars, thinking it would cost $12bil, and it turns out that it would cost $150bil, that doesn't mean I "called for spending $150bil to put a man on Mars." Now "there is no reason we can't generate 80% of our electricity using nuclear power" isn't true within a certain time frame. But I didn't see any mention of a time frame by McCain. Romm talks about "by 2050" but I don't see any such statement from McCain. If we can't do that by 2050, than we could by 2100. Whether we should or not is another question, but whatever your answer to that question my point about the headline of the article being false, is a valid one. McCain did not "call for 700+ new nuclear plants".

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next