27 Jun 2007 15:58:51 GMTSource: Reuters
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
World cannot afford nuclear climate solution-report
27 Jun 2007 15:58:51 GMT
Sunday, June 24, 2007
Bush: 'Nuclear a key to economic vitality'
22 June 2007
US President George Bush paid a visit to the recently restarted Browns Ferry 1 nuclear power unit on 21 June, making forthright statements on the benefits of nuclear power.
Bush visited the machine shop and control room of the 1155 MWe boiling water reactor unit before addressing about 230 workers and local officials.
In a wide-ranging speech on energy, Bush hailed nuclear as a safe, clean, affordable and reliable power source, which "is a key component of economic vitality, because it provides 20% of electricity."
On environmental issues, he said that "if you are interested in cleaning up the air, then you ought to be an advocate for nuclear power... There is no single solution to climate change, but there can be no solution without nuclear power."
Read More
22 June 2007
US President George Bush paid a visit to the recently restarted Browns Ferry 1 nuclear power unit on 21 June, making forthright statements on the benefits of nuclear power.
 US President George Bush in the Browns Ferry 1 control room. (Image: White House, Chris Greenberg) |
In a wide-ranging speech on energy, Bush hailed nuclear as a safe, clean, affordable and reliable power source, which "is a key component of economic vitality, because it provides 20% of electricity."
On environmental issues, he said that "if you are interested in cleaning up the air, then you ought to be an advocate for nuclear power... There is no single solution to climate change, but there can be no solution without nuclear power."
Read More
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
San Francisco To Explore Tidal Power Options In Bay
 just whack on a couple of sluice gates and catch the running tide... |
San Francisco CA (SPX) Jun 20, 2007
In support of ongoing efforts to increase California's renewable power supplies and address climate change, Pacific Gas and Electric Company today signed an agreement with the City and County of San Francisco and the Golden Gate Energy Company to conduct the most comprehensive study yet undertaken to assess the possibilities for harnessing the tides in San Francisco Bay to create a new source of zero- emissions, renewable electric power for California energy customers.
Read More
Sunday, June 17, 2007
The Pentagon v. peak oil
Published on 14 Jun 2007 by Tomdispatch.com.
Sixteen gallons of oil. That's how much the average American soldier in Iraq and Afghanistan consumes on a daily basis -- either directly, through the use of Humvees, tanks, trucks, and helicopters, or indirectly, by calling in air strikes. Multiply this figure by 162,000 soldiers in Iraq, 24,000 in Afghanistan, and 30,000 in the surrounding region (including sailors aboard U.S. warships in the Persian Gulf) and you arrive at approximately 3.5 million gallons of oil: the daily petroleum tab for U.S. combat operations in the Middle East war zone.
Multiply that daily tab by 365 and you get 1.3 billion gallons: the estimated annual oil expenditure for U.S. combat operations in Southwest Asia. That's greater than the total annual oil usage of Bangladesh, population 150 million -- and yet it's a gross underestimate of the Pentagon's wartime consumption.
Such numbers cannot do full justice to the extraordinary gas-guzzling expense of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. After all, for every soldier stationed "in theater," there are two more in transit, in training, or otherwise in line for eventual deployment to the war zone -- soldiers who also consume enormous amounts of oil, even if less than their compatriots overseas. Moreover, to sustain an "expeditionary" army located halfway around the world, the Department of Defense must move millions of tons of arms, ammunition, food, fuel, and equipment every year by plane or ship, consuming additional tanker-loads of petroleum. Add this to the tally and the Pentagon's war-related oil budget jumps appreciably, though exactly how much we have no real way of knowing. Read More
by Michael T. Klare
Sixteen gallons of oil. That's how much the average American soldier in Iraq and Afghanistan consumes on a daily basis -- either directly, through the use of Humvees, tanks, trucks, and helicopters, or indirectly, by calling in air strikes. Multiply this figure by 162,000 soldiers in Iraq, 24,000 in Afghanistan, and 30,000 in the surrounding region (including sailors aboard U.S. warships in the Persian Gulf) and you arrive at approximately 3.5 million gallons of oil: the daily petroleum tab for U.S. combat operations in the Middle East war zone.
Multiply that daily tab by 365 and you get 1.3 billion gallons: the estimated annual oil expenditure for U.S. combat operations in Southwest Asia. That's greater than the total annual oil usage of Bangladesh, population 150 million -- and yet it's a gross underestimate of the Pentagon's wartime consumption.
Such numbers cannot do full justice to the extraordinary gas-guzzling expense of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. After all, for every soldier stationed "in theater," there are two more in transit, in training, or otherwise in line for eventual deployment to the war zone -- soldiers who also consume enormous amounts of oil, even if less than their compatriots overseas. Moreover, to sustain an "expeditionary" army located halfway around the world, the Department of Defense must move millions of tons of arms, ammunition, food, fuel, and equipment every year by plane or ship, consuming additional tanker-loads of petroleum. Add this to the tally and the Pentagon's war-related oil budget jumps appreciably, though exactly how much we have no real way of knowing. Read More
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)