http://www.okgazette.com/article/11-17-2010/Activist_encourages_participation_in_the_fight_aga inst_nuclear_power.aspx

So how well are they getting along with the undesirable byproducts of nuclear power in countries like France, where it's more common than in the USA? There could be more constructive things to be learned in France about it than in the USA.

For various reasons France is not my idea of how to do anything except the nuclear power industry. They have been highly successful in expansion of the industry and the electrical power it produces. Modern reactors/procedures/used fuel reprocessing the list goes on. If we want to expand our programs we would do well to study the French model.

The problems they have overcome is educationg the public and not devolving into the silly fear mongering/half truths/ouright lies about what it is and what it is not. I say that with a correct design and construction build'em.

The cynic in me says that Granger's movement is astroturf funded by the likes of OneOk and Chesapeake who want natural gas and/or coal to dominate.

Midtowner I would not bet against your assessment.

Well hot damn. She comes from Baltimore to tell us we don't need Nuclear Power.

Someone is paying that bill and it ain't her. And there are only a handful of people with reason to do it.

Also, the stuff she's spouting about radiation affecting things surrounding power plants? Completely untrue and unfounded. She's a media pro (which bodes well for my astroturf analysis) in that she understands the "big lie" method. Take the lie, repeat it often enough, don't admit that the opposing views could even possibly have merit, etc.

Nuclear fuel is stable in price, it's cheap to deliver, produces zero CO2, produces zero airborne pollution. It's pretty good stuff, really.