"Jim Yanik" wrote in message
...
"Pete C." wrote in :

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

"Jim Yanik" wrote in message
...
"Pete C." wrote in
:

Phisherman wrote:

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 03:28:42 -0600, Jim Redelfs
wrote:

Say "goodbye" to the venerable 100w and 75w, cheap, light bulb.
(Thomas Alva Edison will surely turn over in his grave).


And say "Hello" to additional mercury compounds (from fluorescent
tubes) seeping into our soils.

Supposedly the 75% power savings prevents more mercury emissions from
coal fired power plants than the mercury contained in the lamp.


Then they want us to convert to electric autos...
Using nuclear power plants will eliminate even more mercury emissions.

Not to complicate the issue, but a number of arms control experts have
pointed out that there's only one way we'll stop "rogue states" from
eventually developing nuclear weapons: Eliminate civilian nuclear power
plants.

Every benefit comes with a hidden horror show.

As empty and bogus an argument by the anti-nuke propagandists as there
is. Development of nuclear weapons by a "rogue state" in no way depends
on the presence of civilian nuclear power plants.


Many if not most states that developed nuclear weapons did it with
government-owned reactors;there's no such animal as a "civilian" nuclear
power plant in Russia,China or North Korea.I suspect Israel's Dimona
reactor is gov't owned,too.

--
Jim Yanik


Oh fer crissake....you know exactly what I meant when I used the word
"civilian".