I watched Obama's speech with some friends who are avid Obama supporters. I wasn't all teary eyed and impressed like they were with Obama's speech.
I'm a strong cynic when it comes to politicians and events like the DNC. So as much as Obama resonates with me and my own dreams and desire of change, I'm still idling in regards to believing that substantial change will follow his election. (Anything would be better at this stage of the game.) But, I do want to believe, and I believe in Obama's message about living up to the promise of the American Dream.
His message about standing up to Iran and protecting Israel had me concerned, though. I honestly believe that Iran is only standing up to the world bully - the USA.
As an environmental note, I am tired of hearing about how governments are asking Iran to stop developing nuclear technology out of fear of turning them into bombs. Not once have I read about any country or group warning the Iranians about the environmental dangers of nuclear energy. What do they plan to do with their waste, for instance? That for me is a much bigger, and long-term concern.
But I digress. In regards to not getting fooled again by the Bush legacy, one of the friends I watched Obama's speech turned to me, clutching her heart, tears in her eyes and said, "What are we going to do if McCain wins? It scares me to think about it."
Do American voters have enough sense, or are we still too entrenched in an aversion to race or still too attached to our idea that a president must be creeping into senior citizen status? We'll see, we'll see... Now, we just need to keep Jeb Bush away from the ballots.
Obama | Change | Yes We Can | Hope
2008-08-29 08:47:15 Posted by roguewriter ()
I imagine the Iranians do the same thing with their nuclear waste that we do in North America... bury it deep underground.
In Canada for example we bury a lot of it in old mine shafts in northern Ontario, in some cases in old uranium mines so its a bit like returning it to the place from whence it came.
A fan of ours sent us a list earlier today regarding the Bush Legacy, which we've posted.
2008-08-29 09:08:19 Posted by Charles ()
In regards to burying nuclear waste, Charles, ouch! It doesn't work like that, man. Uranium is enriched and is not returned in it's original form. In addition, that nuclear waste is prone to leak into ground water. And let's not talk about the transportation of that waste to the waste site. Would you appreciate nuclear waste being transported through your neighborhood.
I've seen radiation maps developed by Raytheon that would convince you never to travel through central Nevada via the highway.
To truly learn about the serious negative downside of using nuclear energy, I recommend a little research on Nevada's Yucca Mountain.
Now, this doesn't mean that I think nuclear energy is a bad idea. If it weren't for the waste, it would be the greatest source of energy on the planet.
I've heard of some truly terrific alternatives that have been suggested. I especially like the idea of sending the waste into tectonic subduction zones. The levels of radiation that emit from these zones at a certain depth are greater than the waste itself. The waste would be melted down and truly returned to where it came from.
Another idea is to shoot the waste into the sun. Scientists are almost 100% certain that it would not disrupt the sun. The danger lies in the launch. What would happen if the rocket that carries the waste blew up in the inner atmosphere, for instance? Can you say nuclear fallout or dirty bomb.
The current invention of nanotube technology, however, has brought new merit to this possibility. The idea would be to create a "space ladder." Once the waste was brought into space, it would then be launched in a rocket with no worries about explosions.
The thought of these possibilities sends shivers of excitement up my spine. Welcome to the 21st century!
2008-09-01 15:07:06 Posted by roguewriter ()
Extremely few people live in remote locations of northern Ontario (some areas have no people living there at all), thus making it one of the more ideal places to bury such waste. I agree, its not much of a plan, but its what governments do.
You wouldn't be drinking the ground water in such locations anyway. Almost all water that is safe to drink up there is trucked in.
Another idea that has been floated around would be to dump it all in a volcano (volcanoes are radioactive anyway) in some remote location like Greenland.
Should also point out not all nuclear waste is useless. Heavy water is used in chemical plants because it has a higher boiling point, and various heavy metals like plutonium (the key ingredient of nuclear bombs) are simply too dangerous to just bury in the ground.
Governments, as we've both no doubt discovered, are too cheap to think of launching nuclear waste via rocket into the sun. They look for whatever is cheapest and sparks as being the most "out of sight, out of mind".
2008-09-01 15:27:20 Posted by Charles ()