Not too long ago, we reviewed a report that looked at nuclear energy (and other energy sources) as biodiversity agents. This had to do, in part, with the amount of land a facility needs to function. Nuclear energy and fossil fuel plants use relatively little, wind farms and solar arrays quite a lot of land . Based on an objective and transparent analysis of our sustainable energy choices, we have come to the evidence-based conclusion that nuclear energy is a good option for biodiversity conservation (and society in general) and that other alternatives to fossil fuels should be subjected to the same cost–benefit analyses (in terms of biodiversity and climate outcomes, as well as sociopolitical imperatives) before accepting or dismissing them. Writer Barry Brook, who collected 75 scientists to endorse his paper, is interested in land use as it impacts flora and fauna. Biodiversity concerns do not get as much play as they might – and, when they do, it annoys many when land is withdraw...
It's been a good few months for Carly Fiorina; the once-embattled former president and CEO of Hewlett-Packard is now an advisor and leading surrogate for the McCain presidential campaign. Fiorina has recently been mentioned as a possible running mate with Senator McCain. Today she appeared in the "B" segment on ABC's This Week. Here she is on McCain and nuclear energy,
Comments
The BWM asks, if a vandal ran through the streets breaking every window in town, would that create economic wealth because the employment of glaziers and glassmakers would increase? The inference here is that the metric for an energy option should be how many jobs it delivers and not the resultant price of energy for the economy.
BTW, here in Silicon Valley, people still spit on the ground when they mention her name. She is a very poor choice for McCain.
On the other hand, I have never known any politician to understand anything about economics, and sadly, most corporate executives fall into this category, also; hence Carly.
But at least Carly is openly pro-nuclear, though perhaps we could do without friends like that.
When she was canned, employees played clips of "Ding Dong the wicked witch is dead."
I can't imagine why anyone would want to tie themselves to someone so hated by 100,000 plus people.
Are a hundred thousand people smarter than one person?
Is one person smarter than a hundred thousand?
I expect that they are equally stupid.
After all, Californians wanted the current ban on new nuke generation. So now they are stuck with wind mills that don't work in the summer, and coal-fired electricity imports. That a hundred thousand in the land of fruits and nuts hate Carly is hardly indicative of malfeasance, as I pointed out before.
BTW, all men (and women) are equal in one thing: the height to which human stupidity can rise (or better yet, the depth to which it can descend). That Carly shows this individually and Californians show this collectively is hardly surprising.
Carly was not the choice of anyone but a slim majority of the Board of Directors of H-P. She has not, to my knowledge, stood for any elected government position.
Secondly, the people of California voted to reject a ban on new nuclear TWICE when it was on the ballot as an initiative. The ban was an act of the state legislature while controlled by Democratic Party during the Jerry Brown administration. Unfortunately, we citizens are responsible for our elected officials.
I will agree that it is better that the McCain organization have a spokeswoman with a pro-nuclear position than with an anti-nuclear position.
I suspect her real role is fund raiser from corporate types. Her association with the Silicon Valley Manufacturers Group and assorted venture capitalists should be fruitful.
Whereas IBM selling its computer division as Wallstreet wanted, it lost contact with many in the channel, and couldn't offer the full platform.
--aa2
It is therefore obvious that the "peepul" don't always know what is best for them.
Now Joseph did point, "...the people of California voted to reject a ban on new nuclear TWICE when it was on the ballot as an initiative. "
But the "peepul" keep on voting for anti-nuclear Democrats in the land of fruits and nuts. So the "peepul" reap what they have sown: summer brownouts and blackouts.
Maybe - just maybe - we need more individuals like Carly Fiorina who aren't afraid of what the "peepul" say or want, and who will do what is right and correct in spite of the wishes of the "peepul" to the contrary.
But then again, as Thomas Jefferson said, the "peepul" deserve the government they get, and perhaps they don't after all merit Carly Fiorina's leadership.
The "peepul" want success without labor, without pain; but they are more than contented to remain in the misery of complacency so long as bread and circuses from the public treasury are provided.
If people in Malaysia work for less money than people in the States, and thereby save the company money, then how is Carly NOT doing her job?