Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Strictly: Drilling and oil-field services -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: heraclitus who wrote (75483)	10/3/2000 7:12:31 PM
From: Sharp_End_Of_Drill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 95453

Homer, with a name like that you just might be tweakin' the valves at some nuke plant somewhere. Had any good donuts lately - <vbg>. Slider, If what you say about a Nasdaq meltdown occurs do you think that energy stocks will be safe? My gut feel is that when it gets really ugly the only thing safe is cash and we're all going to get whacked. Sharp

To: heraclitus who wrote (75483)	10/3/2000 11:18:56 PM
From: Think4Yourself	Respond to of 95453

I agree with your analysis of Nukes. Worked at San Onofre many years ago and had many friends with extensive reactor knowledge and experience. You want to run it with the rods out as far as safely possible to get the full benefit and even consumption of the fuel. It's a "use it or lose it" scenario. Another issue is the regulatory process required for any change. We used to (only partially jokingly) say that we could generate power cheaper by burning $1 bills. Keeping the reactor in steady state was most cost effective.