I realize that Don, as a neighbor of the former Maine Yankee Atomic Power Plant, wants to get that high-level fuel out of there and in someone else's back yard. He correctly states many of the problems of nuclear power, but in the end, he falls down when he suggests that all will be forgiven, and that climate change can be addressed by nukes, if the waste is buried at some place like-Yucca Mountain.
Wrong. There are still several unsurmountable problems with nukes.

Because it is so expensive, nukes are the least effective way to displace global warming- wind power, for example, is five times cheaper to build. Nukes are slow, too: it would take at least about ten years to build a new plant. Wind power is expected to equal current nuke capacity in twenty years. Further, since the economics don't work, no utility can get financing unless 100% of the cost of construction is guaranteed by the taxpayer. Imagine your financial advisor telling you that he wants you to invest something that is so risky that no one else in the world will put up their money, unless it is 100% guaranteed by the government. Combine that with the fact that no insurance company in the world will insure you against a nuclear accident. And nuclear plants are high-level terrorist targets, impossible to hide.
The Yucca Mountain site has problems, not the least of which is that they didn't profit from Maine's waste, and they have registered voters out there, too. Those Americans, many of whom fought for their country, don't want the waste.
Nuclear plants continue to run in Texas, because Bush cancelled the nuke dump slated for West Texas. Unfortunately, one of the best ways to stop more nuke plants from being built with taxpayer money is to make sure that those who enjoyed them keep their waste.

I suspect that everyone would agree that the waste from nuclear power plants needs to be stored safely, to the greatest extent possible.

But to write off the possibility of any future nuclear plants is simply denying a partial solution to the energy crisis.

Wind power is another solution, but we do not have twenty years to wait for this source of energy to "reach the level" of current nuclear-supplied energy.

The environmentalists managed to destroy all opportunities for hydroelectic power here in Maine by dismantling the dams capable of contributing and generally blocking any plans to reinstate the potential for that form of energy production. They have yet to weigh in on possibilities of harnassing the power of ocean tides, but no doubt they will find plenty of fault there.

Other nations in the world already have considerable nuclear development (France, for one, with even Japan considering nuclear power development).

We will never be able to stem the assault on our economy unless we pursue all available avenues of producing energy, to include drilling and mining of oil shale here in the U.S.

You still don't get it. It would take TEN years to build a nuclear plant, and you could build FIVE TIMES as much wind power in two years for the same cost.
Wall Street's Moody's Investment service has consistently advised against nuclear power investments.

Utilities won't touch nuke investments unless the taxpayer guarantees 100% of their investment.
That's pretty lame when you also consider that if the plant is built, the owners are virtually guaranteed the sale of all power nukes would produce.
Give it up! Nukes have crashed and burned on Wall Street. The experiment failed in Maine, as the Maine Yankee plant, one of the more inexpensively built plants in the U.S, closed its doors twelve years ago. Why? Because they couldn't pay their bills. Get real!

Capt. Linnell,

You raise some excellent points. To the other gentleman's response, however, I would say that I think our overall lack of knowledge and understanding of the issues is what causes a lot of problems. It is so difficult, without all of us really taking the time to become fully educated on the issues to make a functional decision as to which energy option is our best approach. I think we all (or most of us anyway) agree we need to do something and, in my opinion, need to do something fast!; but what is the best solution or combination of solutions?

Your comments are very effective because in addition to the interesting information that you are presenting, reading it also makes me realize how much false information is out there. It would be nice to leave it to the political world to decide this all, but obviously that would leave it, in a lot of situations, up to the lobbyist.

Somehow, however, we, the general public, need to come together and move on this. Time is running, or has already, run out !!