Brian Stell <bstell@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:AVeNe.524$GV7.75@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net:

> Jim Yanik wrote:
>> "Leonard Caillouet" <no@no.com> wrote in
>> newsTPMe.35516$Ji.3946@lakeread02:
>>
>>
>>>"Brian Stell" <bstell@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
>>>news:8oJMe.197$L03.96@newssvr27.news.prodigy.ne t...
>>>
>>>>>I grew up in the midst of chemical plants in Louisiana and would
>>>>>trade a nuclear plant or storage facility for that in a second.
>>>>
>>>>Wouldn't it be better to clean up the chemical plant?
>>
>>
>> Chemical plants often have ACCIDENTS;releases of toxic chemicals.
>> Remember Bhopal,India?
>
> Yes, quite well. It was horrible. So was Chernobyl.
>
> My point is: rather than suggest we should trade one
> bad situation for another bad situation, wouldn't it
> be better to put effort into cleaning things up?

Chernobyl was rare,chem plants OFTEN have toxic spills,with OFTEN
disastrous results.
Same for oil refineries or storage.
Nuclear power has a MUCH better safety record,and MUCH cleaner for the
environment.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

 

Brian Stell <bstell@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:AVeNe.524$GV7.75@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net:

> Jim Yanik wrote:
>> "Leonard Caillouet" <no@no.com> wrote in
>> newsTPMe.35516$Ji.3946@lakeread02:
>>
>>
>>>"Brian Stell" <bstell@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
>>>news:8oJMe.197$L03.96@newssvr27.news.prodigy.ne t...
>>>
>>>>>I grew up in the midst of chemical plants in Louisiana and would
>>>>>trade a nuclear plant or storage facility for that in a second.
>>>>
>>>>Wouldn't it be better to clean up the chemical plant?
>>
>>
>> Chemical plants often have ACCIDENTS;releases of toxic chemicals.
>> Remember Bhopal,India?
>
> Yes, quite well. It was horrible. So was Chernobyl.
>
> My point is: rather than suggest we should trade one
> bad situation for another bad situation, wouldn't it
> be better to put effort into cleaning things up?

Chernobyl was rare,chem plants OFTEN have toxic spills,with OFTEN
disastrous results.
Same for oil refineries or storage.
Nuclear power has a MUCH better safety record,and MUCH cleaner for the
environment.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

 

Brian Stell <bstell@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:zefNe.1132$L03.428@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net :

>>>>>>>Ever heard of the nuclear waste problem?
>>>>>
>>>>>Would you like a nuclear waste dump in your town?
>>>>
>>>>Yucca Mountain,where it's not going to affect anyone,and it's secure.
>>>
>>>There's lots of people in the Yucca Mountain area who
>>>feel differently.
>>
>> Purely NIMBY.
>
> So, back to my question: do you want a nuclear
> waste dump in YOUR town?

So,AGAIN;not RELEVANT,as one picks the safest,best-suited place to locate
the storage facility.


>
>>>"Yucca Mountain"
>>>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/...in579696.shtml
>>>"... the battle is far from over, and the state of Nevada is in
>>>full-scale revolt. A coalition of elected officials, environmentalists
>>>and businessmen is waging a guerrilla war to kill a project they
>>>believe has been shoved down their throats."
>>
>> The stuff HAS to go somewhere;and nobody came up with any better site.
>
> We need to stop producing it. We are passing on a problem
> that has to be dealt with for 10,000+ years.
>
>> Under a mountain in the middle of a vast empty land seems about right.
>
> The people living in Nevada don't see it as a vast empty
> land. They live there.

And it's STILL a vast empty land.
Most of it is owned by the Federal Government,too.

>
>>>My point is: It is inconsistent to say it is safe unless
>>>you personally are willing to have you and those you care
>>>about live near it.
>>>
>>>So far I've heard a lot of "in a perfect world it would
>>>be okay".
>>
>> It's OK because it's far better than what we have now.
>
> Okay, so you want to move it into someone else's
> backyard. Isn't that the very NIMBY you mention?

No,it's based on science and logic,not emotion.

>
> If nuclear power is so wonderful let the people who
> benefit from it live near it's waste. Don't shove it
> down someone else's throat.
>

Some time in the future,we ALL will be benefitting from it.
It's time to plan for that NOW,so face reality.


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

 

Brian Stell <bstell@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:zefNe.1132$L03.428@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net :

>>>>>>>Ever heard of the nuclear waste problem?
>>>>>
>>>>>Would you like a nuclear waste dump in your town?
>>>>
>>>>Yucca Mountain,where it's not going to affect anyone,and it's secure.
>>>
>>>There's lots of people in the Yucca Mountain area who
>>>feel differently.
>>
>> Purely NIMBY.
>
> So, back to my question: do you want a nuclear
> waste dump in YOUR town?

So,AGAIN;not RELEVANT,as one picks the safest,best-suited place to locate
the storage facility.


>
>>>"Yucca Mountain"
>>>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/...in579696.shtml
>>>"... the battle is far from over, and the state of Nevada is in
>>>full-scale revolt. A coalition of elected officials, environmentalists
>>>and businessmen is waging a guerrilla war to kill a project they
>>>believe has been shoved down their throats."
>>
>> The stuff HAS to go somewhere;and nobody came up with any better site.
>
> We need to stop producing it. We are passing on a problem
> that has to be dealt with for 10,000+ years.
>
>> Under a mountain in the middle of a vast empty land seems about right.
>
> The people living in Nevada don't see it as a vast empty
> land. They live there.

And it's STILL a vast empty land.
Most of it is owned by the Federal Government,too.

>
>>>My point is: It is inconsistent to say it is safe unless
>>>you personally are willing to have you and those you care
>>>about live near it.
>>>
>>>So far I've heard a lot of "in a perfect world it would
>>>be okay".
>>
>> It's OK because it's far better than what we have now.
>
> Okay, so you want to move it into someone else's
> backyard. Isn't that the very NIMBY you mention?

No,it's based on science and logic,not emotion.

>
> If nuclear power is so wonderful let the people who
> benefit from it live near it's waste. Don't shove it
> down someone else's throat.
>

Some time in the future,we ALL will be benefitting from it.
It's time to plan for that NOW,so face reality.


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

 

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:45:51 GMT, Brian Stell <bstell@ix.netcom.com>
wrote:

>>>>>>>Ever heard of the nuclear waste problem?
>>>>>
>>>>>Would you like a nuclear waste dump in your town?
>>>>
>>>>Yucca Mountain,where it's not going to affect anyone,and it's secure.
>>>
>>>There's lots of people in the Yucca Mountain area who
>>>feel differently.
>>
>> Purely NIMBY.
>
>So, back to my question: do you want a nuclear
>waste dump in YOUR town?

Doesn't bother me, but then, i used to work at a nuclear reprocessing
facility...

>

 

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:45:51 GMT, Brian Stell <bstell@ix.netcom.com>
wrote:

>>>>>>>Ever heard of the nuclear waste problem?
>>>>>
>>>>>Would you like a nuclear waste dump in your town?
>>>>
>>>>Yucca Mountain,where it's not going to affect anyone,and it's secure.
>>>
>>>There's lots of people in the Yucca Mountain area who
>>>feel differently.
>>
>> Purely NIMBY.
>
>So, back to my question: do you want a nuclear
>waste dump in YOUR town?

Doesn't bother me, but then, i used to work at a nuclear reprocessing
facility...

>

 

In article <Xns96B7D9967D438jyanikkuanet@129.250.170.84>, Jim Yanik
<jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote:

> flobert <nomail@here.NOT> wrote in
> news:0p6cg1hcvdoorqlq04oluh3cfjq0sn9231@4ax.com:
>
> > On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:45:51 GMT, Brian Stell <bstell@ix.netcom.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>>>>>>>Ever heard of the nuclear waste problem?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Would you like a nuclear waste dump in your town?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Yucca Mountain,where it's not going to affect anyone,and it's secure.
> >>>>
> >>>>There's lots of people in the Yucca Mountain area who
> >>>>feel differently.
> >>>
> >>> Purely NIMBY.
> >>
> >>So, back to my question: do you want a nuclear
> >>waste dump in YOUR town?
> >
> > Doesn't bother me, but then, i used to work at a nuclear reprocessing
> > facility...
> >
> >>
> >
>
> Many cities ALREADY HAVE a nuclear waste dump nearby,and very vulnerable to
> terrorists.Many also get nuclear shipments trucked through them,too.
> Any city with a fair-sized hospital.
>
> I believe that many of the nearby residents are looking forward to
> good,high-paying government jobs from Yucca Mtn.

Hello,
Those facts don't matter to the greenies. They just want to close down
nuclear power plants. There was a protest at the local nuclear power plant
about 15 years ago. I drove by the plant very early in the morning and saw
about a dozen really expensive cars and motor homes. I later watched the
nightly news shows and saw several famous actors being interviewed. I
realized that those expensive cars and motor homes belonged to those rich
actors and other rich people that drove from their million dollar homes in
Hollywood. They used lots of gasoline to travel to my small town and only
God knows how much wood
was used to make their million dollar homes. I would NEVER donate money to
any greenie group.
Jason

--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.

 

In article <Xns96B7D9967D438jyanikkuanet@129.250.170.84>, Jim Yanik
<jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote:

> flobert <nomail@here.NOT> wrote in
> news:0p6cg1hcvdoorqlq04oluh3cfjq0sn9231@4ax.com:
>
> > On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:45:51 GMT, Brian Stell <bstell@ix.netcom.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>>>>>>>Ever heard of the nuclear waste problem?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Would you like a nuclear waste dump in your town?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Yucca Mountain,where it's not going to affect anyone,and it's secure.
> >>>>
> >>>>There's lots of people in the Yucca Mountain area who
> >>>>feel differently.
> >>>
> >>> Purely NIMBY.
> >>
> >>So, back to my question: do you want a nuclear
> >>waste dump in YOUR town?
> >
> > Doesn't bother me, but then, i used to work at a nuclear reprocessing
> > facility...
> >
> >>
> >
>
> Many cities ALREADY HAVE a nuclear waste dump nearby,and very vulnerable to
> terrorists.Many also get nuclear shipments trucked through them,too.
> Any city with a fair-sized hospital.
>
> I believe that many of the nearby residents are looking forward to
> good,high-paying government jobs from Yucca Mtn.

Hello,
Those facts don't matter to the greenies. They just want to close down
nuclear power plants. There was a protest at the local nuclear power plant
about 15 years ago. I drove by the plant very early in the morning and saw
about a dozen really expensive cars and motor homes. I later watched the
nightly news shows and saw several famous actors being interviewed. I
realized that those expensive cars and motor homes belonged to those rich
actors and other rich people that drove from their million dollar homes in
Hollywood. They used lots of gasoline to travel to my small town and only
God knows how much wood
was used to make their million dollar homes. I would NEVER donate money to
any greenie group.
Jason

--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.

 

In some respects the "greenies" may be our own worst enemies. For example
look at the debacle they've created in California. Poor Californians have
had to screw around with special "California Emissions" vehicles for over
20 years. The vehicles cost incrementally more and are hard to sell
outside of California. They also require special additives in their
gasoline, making theirs the most expensive fuwl in the contiguous 48
states, more than 50¢ gallon higher than some states.

During the California "energy crisis" a few years ago my employer tried to
build a clean, natural gas-fired electric generating plant in Simi Valley
but couldn't get the damn thing licensed in Calif. because of the absurd
regulations and punitive licensing fees.

Californians did this to themselves and the same group 9or rather same
mindset) is now trying to do it everywhere.

Blocking the long term storage of spent fuel rods at Yucca Mountain has
effectively shut down *ALL* future nuclear powered elect generating
stations. Why? Because your Federal Govt enacted legislation that says you
cannot get a license to build a nuke plant if you don't have available
storage for spent fuel rods. Of course you can store them on site at the
nuke station itself but then that means having a nuclear waste site at
every new generating station and we know the greenies will never stand for
that.



In article <jason-2008051045400001@pm4-broad-39.snlo.dialup.fix.net>
jason@nospam.com (Jason) writes:

>In article <Xns96B7D9967D438jyanikkuanet@129.250.170.84>, Jim Yanik
><jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote:
>
>> flobert <nomail@here.NOT> wrote in
>> news:0p6cg1hcvdoorqlq04oluh3cfjq0sn9231@4ax.com:
>>
>> > On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:45:51 GMT, Brian Stell <bstell@ix.netcom.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >>>>>>>>Ever heard of the nuclear waste problem?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>Would you like a nuclear waste dump in your town?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>Yucca Mountain,where it's not going to affect anyone,and it's secure.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>There's lots of people in the Yucca Mountain area who
>> >>>>feel differently.
>> >>>
>> >>> Purely NIMBY.
>> >>
>> >>So, back to my question: do you want a nuclear
>> >>waste dump in YOUR town?
>> >
>> > Doesn't bother me, but then, i used to work at a nuclear reprocessing
>> > facility...
>> >
>> >>
>> >
>>
>> Many cities ALREADY HAVE a nuclear waste dump nearby,and very vulnerable to
>> terrorists.Many also get nuclear shipments trucked through them,too.
>> Any city with a fair-sized hospital.
>>
>> I believe that many of the nearby residents are looking forward to
>> good,high-paying government jobs from Yucca Mtn.
>
>Hello,
>Those facts don't matter to the greenies. They just want to close down
>nuclear power plants. There was a protest at the local nuclear power plant
>about 15 years ago. I drove by the plant very early in the morning and saw
>about a dozen really expensive cars and motor homes. I later watched the
>nightly news shows and saw several famous actors being interviewed. I
>realized that those expensive cars and motor homes belonged to those rich
>actors and other rich people that drove from their million dollar homes in
>Hollywood. They used lots of gasoline to travel to my small town and only
>God knows how much wood
>was used to make their million dollar homes. I would NEVER donate money to
>any greenie group.
>Jason

 

In some respects the "greenies" may be our own worst enemies. For example
look at the debacle they've created in California. Poor Californians have
had to screw around with special "California Emissions" vehicles for over
20 years. The vehicles cost incrementally more and are hard to sell
outside of California. They also require special additives in their
gasoline, making theirs the most expensive fuwl in the contiguous 48
states, more than 50¢ gallon higher than some states.

During the California "energy crisis" a few years ago my employer tried to
build a clean, natural gas-fired electric generating plant in Simi Valley
but couldn't get the damn thing licensed in Calif. because of the absurd
regulations and punitive licensing fees.

Californians did this to themselves and the same group 9or rather same
mindset) is now trying to do it everywhere.

Blocking the long term storage of spent fuel rods at Yucca Mountain has
effectively shut down *ALL* future nuclear powered elect generating
stations. Why? Because your Federal Govt enacted legislation that says you
cannot get a license to build a nuke plant if you don't have available
storage for spent fuel rods. Of course you can store them on site at the
nuke station itself but then that means having a nuclear waste site at
every new generating station and we know the greenies will never stand for
that.



In article <jason-2008051045400001@pm4-broad-39.snlo.dialup.fix.net>
jason@nospam.com (Jason) writes:

>In article <Xns96B7D9967D438jyanikkuanet@129.250.170.84>, Jim Yanik
><jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote:
>
>> flobert <nomail@here.NOT> wrote in
>> news:0p6cg1hcvdoorqlq04oluh3cfjq0sn9231@4ax.com:
>>
>> > On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:45:51 GMT, Brian Stell <bstell@ix.netcom.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >>>>>>>>Ever heard of the nuclear waste problem?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>Would you like a nuclear waste dump in your town?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>Yucca Mountain,where it's not going to affect anyone,and it's secure.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>There's lots of people in the Yucca Mountain area who
>> >>>>feel differently.
>> >>>
>> >>> Purely NIMBY.
>> >>
>> >>So, back to my question: do you want a nuclear
>> >>waste dump in YOUR town?
>> >
>> > Doesn't bother me, but then, i used to work at a nuclear reprocessing
>> > facility...
>> >
>> >>
>> >
>>
>> Many cities ALREADY HAVE a nuclear waste dump nearby,and very vulnerable to
>> terrorists.Many also get nuclear shipments trucked through them,too.
>> Any city with a fair-sized hospital.
>>
>> I believe that many of the nearby residents are looking forward to
>> good,high-paying government jobs from Yucca Mtn.
>
>Hello,
>Those facts don't matter to the greenies. They just want to close down
>nuclear power plants. There was a protest at the local nuclear power plant
>about 15 years ago. I drove by the plant very early in the morning and saw
>about a dozen really expensive cars and motor homes. I later watched the
>nightly news shows and saw several famous actors being interviewed. I
>realized that those expensive cars and motor homes belonged to those rich
>actors and other rich people that drove from their million dollar homes in
>Hollywood. They used lots of gasoline to travel to my small town and only
>God knows how much wood
>was used to make their million dollar homes. I would NEVER donate money to
>any greenie group.
>Jason

 

In article <7greg117u9iu821r9c4je798g1o2v505fd@4ax.com>, Bubba
<wdg@[204.52.135.1]> wrote:

> In some respects the "greenies" may be our own worst enemies. For example
> look at the debacle they've created in California. Poor Californians have
> had to screw around with special "California Emissions" vehicles for over
> 20 years. The vehicles cost incrementally more and are hard to sell
> outside of California. They also require special additives in their
> gasoline, making theirs the most expensive fuwl in the contiguous 48
> states, more than 50¢ gallon higher than some states.
>
> During the California "energy crisis" a few years ago my employer tried to
> build a clean, natural gas-fired electric generating plant in Simi Valley
> but couldn't get the damn thing licensed in Calif. because of the absurd
> regulations and punitive licensing fees.
>
> Californians did this to themselves and the same group 9or rather same
> mindset) is now trying to do it everywhere.
>
> Blocking the long term storage of spent fuel rods at Yucca Mountain has
> effectively shut down *ALL* future nuclear powered elect generating
> stations. Why? Because your Federal Govt enacted legislation that says you
> cannot get a license to build a nuke plant if you don't have available
> storage for spent fuel rods. Of course you can store them on site at the
> nuke station itself but then that means having a nuclear waste site at
> every new generating station and we know the greenies will never stand for
> that.


Hello,
You made some great points. I live in California. Several years ago the
greenies worked together to get a law passed that required oil companies
to place some sort of new additive in gasoline. Several years later, it
was discovered that the additive was causing people to get cancer. In
addition, various gas stations had defective tanks and the gasoline leaked
into the ground water. People living near those gas stations came down
with cancer. The oil companies were sued. I read several news report about
those cases and none of the liberal reporters ever mentioned that the
greenies were to blame for causing the cancer causing additive to be
placed in the gas. I realize the oil companies should not have allowed the
gas tanks under the ground to leak. However, the greenies should also have
been sued because they were the ones to blame for causing the additive to
be in the gasoline.
Jason

--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.

 

In article <7greg117u9iu821r9c4je798g1o2v505fd@4ax.com>, Bubba
<wdg@[204.52.135.1]> wrote:

> In some respects the "greenies" may be our own worst enemies. For example
> look at the debacle they've created in California. Poor Californians have
> had to screw around with special "California Emissions" vehicles for over
> 20 years. The vehicles cost incrementally more and are hard to sell
> outside of California. They also require special additives in their
> gasoline, making theirs the most expensive fuwl in the contiguous 48
> states, more than 50¢ gallon higher than some states.
>
> During the California "energy crisis" a few years ago my employer tried to
> build a clean, natural gas-fired electric generating plant in Simi Valley
> but couldn't get the damn thing licensed in Calif. because of the absurd
> regulations and punitive licensing fees.
>
> Californians did this to themselves and the same group 9or rather same
> mindset) is now trying to do it everywhere.
>
> Blocking the long term storage of spent fuel rods at Yucca Mountain has
> effectively shut down *ALL* future nuclear powered elect generating
> stations. Why? Because your Federal Govt enacted legislation that says you
> cannot get a license to build a nuke plant if you don't have available
> storage for spent fuel rods. Of course you can store them on site at the
> nuke station itself but then that means having a nuclear waste site at
> every new generating station and we know the greenies will never stand for
> that.


Hello,
You made some great points. I live in California. Several years ago the
greenies worked together to get a law passed that required oil companies
to place some sort of new additive in gasoline. Several years later, it
was discovered that the additive was causing people to get cancer. In
addition, various gas stations had defective tanks and the gasoline leaked
into the ground water. People living near those gas stations came down
with cancer. The oil companies were sued. I read several news report about
those cases and none of the liberal reporters ever mentioned that the
greenies were to blame for causing the cancer causing additive to be
placed in the gas. I realize the oil companies should not have allowed the
gas tanks under the ground to leak. However, the greenies should also have
been sued because they were the ones to blame for causing the additive to
be in the gasoline.
Jason

--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.

 

Jason wrote:
> In article <7greg117u9iu821r9c4je798g1o2v505fd@4ax.com>, Bubba
> <wdg@[204.52.135.1]> wrote:
>
>
>>In some respects the "greenies" may be our own worst enemies. For example
>>look at the debacle they've created in California. Poor Californians have
>>had to screw around with special "California Emissions" vehicles for over
>>20 years. The vehicles cost incrementally more and are hard to sell
>>outside of California. They also require special additives in their
>>gasoline, making theirs the most expensive fuwl in the contiguous 48
>>states, more than 50¢ gallon higher than some states.
>>
>>During the California "energy crisis" a few years ago my employer tried to
>>build a clean, natural gas-fired electric generating plant in Simi Valley
>>but couldn't get the damn thing licensed in Calif. because of the absurd
>>regulations and punitive licensing fees.
>>
>>Californians did this to themselves and the same group 9or rather same
>>mindset) is now trying to do it everywhere.
>>
>>Blocking the long term storage of spent fuel rods at Yucca Mountain has
>>effectively shut down *ALL* future nuclear powered elect generating
>>stations. Why? Because your Federal Govt enacted legislation that says you
>>cannot get a license to build a nuke plant if you don't have available
>>storage for spent fuel rods. Of course you can store them on site at the
>>nuke station itself but then that means having a nuclear waste site at
>>every new generating station and we know the greenies will never stand for
>>that.
>
>
>
> Hello,
> You made some great points. I live in California. Several years ago the
> greenies worked together to get a law passed that required oil companies
> to place some sort of new additive in gasoline. Several years later, it
> was discovered that the additive was causing people to get cancer. In
> addition, various gas stations had defective tanks and the gasoline leaked
> into the ground water. People living near those gas stations came down
> with cancer. The oil companies were sued. I read several news report about
> those cases and none of the liberal reporters ever mentioned that the
> greenies were to blame for causing the cancer causing additive to be
> placed in the gas. I realize the oil companies should not have allowed the
> gas tanks under the ground to leak. However, the greenies should also have
> been sued because they were the ones to blame for causing the additive to
> be in the gasoline.
> Jason
>

dude, you have that totally ***-over-tip. the additive is mtbe. it was
sold to the california state legislature as an "oxygenate" designed to
reduce emissions, much like ethanol is being used today. it's since
been banned because it contaminates ground water supplies with a taste
like turpentine. now, here's the real rub: mtbe was mandated after
lobbying by arco, whose refining process just happens to produce a lot
of mtbe, much more than they could otherwise use. the hook they used
was "oxygenation" being better for emissions - something that's not
necessary with a fuel injected vehicle, the vast majority of vehicles on
the road. speculation is that the real reason arco wanted mtbe mandated
for all gasoline was not only to get rid of their excess mtbe
production, but also to reduce mpg, therefore increase gas sales. and
they succeeded. but guess whose wife was on the board of arco at the
time this mandate found it's was through the state assembly? go on,
guess...

 

Jason wrote:
> In article <7greg117u9iu821r9c4je798g1o2v505fd@4ax.com>, Bubba
> <wdg@[204.52.135.1]> wrote:
>
>
>>In some respects the "greenies" may be our own worst enemies. For example
>>look at the debacle they've created in California. Poor Californians have
>>had to screw around with special "California Emissions" vehicles for over
>>20 years. The vehicles cost incrementally more and are hard to sell
>>outside of California. They also require special additives in their
>>gasoline, making theirs the most expensive fuwl in the contiguous 48
>>states, more than 50¢ gallon higher than some states.
>>
>>During the California "energy crisis" a few years ago my employer tried to
>>build a clean, natural gas-fired electric generating plant in Simi Valley
>>but couldn't get the damn thing licensed in Calif. because of the absurd
>>regulations and punitive licensing fees.
>>
>>Californians did this to themselves and the same group 9or rather same
>>mindset) is now trying to do it everywhere.
>>
>>Blocking the long term storage of spent fuel rods at Yucca Mountain has
>>effectively shut down *ALL* future nuclear powered elect generating
>>stations. Why? Because your Federal Govt enacted legislation that says you
>>cannot get a license to build a nuke plant if you don't have available
>>storage for spent fuel rods. Of course you can store them on site at the
>>nuke station itself but then that means having a nuclear waste site at
>>every new generating station and we know the greenies will never stand for
>>that.
>
>
>
> Hello,
> You made some great points. I live in California. Several years ago the
> greenies worked together to get a law passed that required oil companies
> to place some sort of new additive in gasoline. Several years later, it
> was discovered that the additive was causing people to get cancer. In
> addition, various gas stations had defective tanks and the gasoline leaked
> into the ground water. People living near those gas stations came down
> with cancer. The oil companies were sued. I read several news report about
> those cases and none of the liberal reporters ever mentioned that the
> greenies were to blame for causing the cancer causing additive to be
> placed in the gas. I realize the oil companies should not have allowed the
> gas tanks under the ground to leak. However, the greenies should also have
> been sued because they were the ones to blame for causing the additive to
> be in the gasoline.
> Jason
>

dude, you have that totally ***-over-tip. the additive is mtbe. it was
sold to the california state legislature as an "oxygenate" designed to
reduce emissions, much like ethanol is being used today. it's since
been banned because it contaminates ground water supplies with a taste
like turpentine. now, here's the real rub: mtbe was mandated after
lobbying by arco, whose refining process just happens to produce a lot
of mtbe, much more than they could otherwise use. the hook they used
was "oxygenation" being better for emissions - something that's not
necessary with a fuel injected vehicle, the vast majority of vehicles on
the road. speculation is that the real reason arco wanted mtbe mandated
for all gasoline was not only to get rid of their excess mtbe
production, but also to reduce mpg, therefore increase gas sales. and
they succeeded. but guess whose wife was on the board of arco at the
time this mandate found it's was through the state assembly? go on,
guess...

 

Bubba <wdg@[204.52.135.1]> wrote in
news:7greg117u9iu821r9c4je798g1o2v505fd@4ax.com:

> In some respects the "greenies" may be our own worst enemies. For
> example look at the debacle they've created in California. Poor
> Californians have had to screw around with special "California
> Emissions" vehicles for over 20 years. The vehicles cost incrementally
> more and are hard to sell outside of California. They also require
> special additives in their gasoline, making theirs the most expensive
> fuwl in the contiguous 48 states, more than 50¢ gallon higher than
> some states.
>
> During the California "energy crisis" a few years ago my employer
> tried to build a clean, natural gas-fired electric generating plant in
> Simi Valley but couldn't get the damn thing licensed in Calif. because
> of the absurd regulations and punitive licensing fees.
>
> Californians did this to themselves and the same group 9or rather same
> mindset) is now trying to do it everywhere.
>
> Blocking the long term storage of spent fuel rods at Yucca Mountain
> has effectively shut down *ALL* future nuclear powered elect
> generating stations. Why? Because your Federal Govt enacted
> legislation that says you cannot get a license to build a nuke plant
> if you don't have available storage for spent fuel rods. Of course you
> can store them on site at the nuke station itself but then that means
> having a nuclear waste site at every new generating station and we
> know the greenies will never stand for that.
>
>
>
> In article <jason-2008051045400001@pm4-broad-39.snlo.dialup.fix.net>
> jason@nospam.com (Jason) writes:
>
>>In article <Xns96B7D9967D438jyanikkuanet@129.250.170.84>, Jim Yanik
>><jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote:
>>
>>> flobert <nomail@here.NOT> wrote in
>>> news:0p6cg1hcvdoorqlq04oluh3cfjq0sn9231@4ax.com:
>>>
>>> > On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:45:51 GMT, Brian Stell
>>> > <bstell@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>>>>>>>Ever heard of the nuclear waste problem?
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>Would you like a nuclear waste dump in your town?
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>Yucca Mountain,where it's not going to affect anyone,and it's
>>> >>>>>secure.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>There's lots of people in the Yucca Mountain area who
>>> >>>>feel differently.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Purely NIMBY.
>>> >>
>>> >>So, back to my question: do you want a nuclear
>>> >>waste dump in YOUR town?
>>> >
>>> > Doesn't bother me, but then, i used to work at a nuclear
>>> > reprocessing facility...
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >
>>>
>>> Many cities ALREADY HAVE a nuclear waste dump nearby,and very
>>> vulnerable to terrorists.Many also get nuclear shipments trucked
>>> through them,too. Any city with a fair-sized hospital.
>>>
>>> I believe that many of the nearby residents are looking forward to
>>> good,high-paying government jobs from Yucca Mtn.
>>
>>Hello,
>>Those facts don't matter to the greenies. They just want to close down
>>nuclear power plants. There was a protest at the local nuclear power
>>plant about 15 years ago. I drove by the plant very early in the
>>morning and saw about a dozen really expensive cars and motor homes. I
>>later watched the nightly news shows and saw several famous actors
>>being interviewed. I realized that those expensive cars and motor
>>homes belonged to those rich actors and other rich people that drove
>>from their million dollar homes in Hollywood. They used lots of
>>gasoline to travel to my small town and only God knows how much wood
>>was used to make their million dollar homes. I would NEVER donate
>>money to any greenie group.
>>Jason
>

I have to laugh at the enviro-nuts;they want everyone to use renewable
energy sources,one being windpower,and now they are trying to get a
California windfarm shut down because the windmills are chopping up birds.

And Sen.Kennedy is pissed bacause power companies want to put a windfarm
waaay far out on the horizon of his Cape Cod home,-ruining his view-!!.
(a barely noticeable windfarm,a mote on the horizon.)

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net