From his speech:
“We must continue changing the way America generates electric power — by even greater use of clean coal technology … solar and wind energy … and clean, safe nuclear power… We must continue investing in new methods of producing ethanol — using everything from wood chips, to grasses, to agricultural wastes.”
But then he said,
“…to further protect America against severe disruptions to our oil supply, I ask Congress to double the current capacity of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. America is on the verge of technological breakthroughs that will enable us to live our lives less dependent on oil.”
Sounds like Bush isn’t talking about less usage as much as he’s talking about where to get the oil (i.e., not from the Middle East). Less than two years left in office and suddenly Bush is an environmental advocate? Doesn’t he just want to chop up our forests and dig in Alaska and wherever else the oil is in the U.S. in the most unrestriced manner possible?
I guess many of you people have no clue that “clean, safe nuclear power” Bush is talking about results in lots of “clean safe” RADIOACTIVE WASTE.
20 Responses
Iran and Libya???
I believe he means cleaner, safer nuclear power. Since, with our current technology nuclear power isn’t safe, it’s very risky.
He actually used the words “global warming” from what I’ve heard.
Clean, safe nuclear power is one of those dreamy things like “honest politician” that we hear about but never see.
So are you complaining the Bush wants to ween or dependency on oil? We have very few energy possibilities right now and nuclear is one.
With the oil reserves, he wants to increase our capacity so therefore we wont be at the day to day whim of what happens in the middle east.
Doublespeak mean anything to you?
Nuclear power plants ARE safe and clean if maintained, run, and secured correctly.
More from “W” i.e. “Iraq botched execution, looked like revenge”.???, “a safe war”, “mission accomplished”.etc…
I will wait for him to put his money where his mouth is…if he passesleislation funding the research and development of alternative fuel sources, I will believe him. If his efforts are concentrated on making sure his petroleum reserve issue is addressed, I will see that he is just blowing smoke and mirrors. But I wondered last night…I had to read the speech in Closed caption, so I didn’t hear him…did he actually say ‘nuclear’? Or did he say ‘nucular’?
Well a couple things are going on here.
First of all, regardless of advances in alternative energy, we will need oil for the foreseeable future. Where we get that is what he’s addressing by things like ANWAR drilling. If we have to use oil, might as well be home pumped.
The capacity of the reserve is primarily used for military uses (and he mentioned growing the standing army by something like 100,000 people), but is also used for disasters in order to relax price pressure (remember Katrina?).
Bush has actually approved more funds for alternative fuel research than any other President.
Sounds like empty promises and new real ideas.
Things change. Opinions, the environment, and the weather. It is impossible to stop change, it is necessary to adapt. That’s what makes us great as a species.
He means like western Europeans, who have been using clean, environmentally safe, cheap nuclear power for over 30 years.
yeah. the evil bastard hasn’t realized that we’re doooooomed unless we all stop driving our cars tomorrow and shut down all the coal fired power plants. We can still stay warm by huddling real close together, and lighting clean-burning candles for light.
Bush hasn’t made any sense since he got in office. He’s only saying what people want to hear cuz’ his popularity has dropped to 34%. The guy has done nothing but put us in debt and he talks in circles. I found the whole State of the Union Address one big joke. He won’t stand behind anything he says.
A 20% reduction in 20 years is a huge figure especially due to the increasing demand we are expected to “NEED”.
Nuclear power is just that,,,safe and clean.
I wholeheartedly agree about the other technologies are necessary but we must be realistic in order to achieve our objectives of eliminating greenhouse gases and creating cheaper fuels.
China has just announced their economy has grown over 10% over the past year for the 4th year in a row.
We must keep our competitive edge or we will be a third world nation eventually.
Without a strong economy we will be buried and the soup lines will be 10 times longer than they were in the 1930’s.
Let’s say we want to (not that HE wants to) remove our dependency on foreign oil, AND develop new, non-oil-based technology.
That technology will take while to develop, no?
And so, we will need our own reserves until we can rely on our new nethods, no?
Also, consider the start-up costs of any new technology. The reason that the first VCR player, DVD player, whatever, was so darned expnsive, was that the company had to pay for the factory itself! Once the factory is paid for, the cost rapidly diminishes.
So, only the rich will be able to test out new technology, while the poor rely on oil reserves until the costs go down.
But, I’d ask an aphasic to review the speech for me first… check out my answer to this… I’m just quoting from the greatest neurolpsychology writer ever, about presidential speeches, here…http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AoH5gDumUXYAYbfB.2OW0ifsy6IX?qid=20070124081141AAmhzzY&show=7#profile-info-AA10051623 um, how else to get you to this?
cincywahi asked :”Should people have to take a competency test…” under Politics/Elections.
all of these things were criticized when carter pressed for them. had we listened then,we wouldn’t have some problems today. i wonder if repubs think it is a good idea now?
The idea of “clean, safe nuclear power” refers to a movement to change the current nuclear regulatory laws on the books to allow the construction of different designs and models of nuclear power plants than the US is currently using. There are newer, safer, cleaner and cheaper models and processes to produce nuclear power (which are very common in France which gets the majority of their electricity from nuclear power) but the current outdated laws at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission reflect the views from 30 years ago when these technologies were unproven and considered too dangerous. In addition, these other technologies required nuclear material that could be easily made into nuclear bombs while the currently approved nuclear materials allegedly cannot be made into nuclear bombs.
Overall, the president was trying to be more bi-partisan by discussing alternative energy opportunities since that issue goes hand in hand with our current diplomatic policy.
Don’t let him fool you. He said he would double the border guards last year and so far he has never funded it. In fact he has cut the funding for our border guards since he has been in office. As far as energy goes, he also said last year that he would be putting more money into alternative energy projects to get America off our dependence of oil. He’s never funded that either. Lesson learned here, the president never keeps his word and he’s just blowing smoke up the butts of the American people.
Guess who has prevented us from using nuclear power?
The Environmental Movement.