Drill baby drill... Ill bet they retire that line...

Jarod said:
LIke when I say he was wrong on offshore drilling?
Click to expand...
You mean before he authorized it?

Anyway, isn't this a bit like a parent who sees a car accident on the TV saying that their kid can never drive? I understand that this is an epic spill, but saying we should never use oil again or do what is necessary to more quickly get off the foreign oil teat is ruthless self-damaging behavior with passive-aggressive traits.
 
Topspin said:
let me guess Jarod DROVE to work today.lol
Click to expand...

Actually, funny you should say that. I did walk today... I live exactly .37 miles from the office. I usually do drive becuse I have to go places during the day.

I never said all offshore drilling should cease immideatly. Never not even once.
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Ahhh, the little dope thinks he's got the high ground....but his first mistake was giving a "for instance" that was NOT one of my suggestions,

Had our intellectually stumped Southern clown actually paid attention to what he read, he would have noted the COMBINATIONS that I offered previously...I NEVER offered "solar only".

And since Southy has demonstrated a REFUSAL to read information that I provide on various topics, it's amazing that he condescends to me regarding research.

So the stage is set...if he refuses to read what I cite and honestly discuss it in details, then he's just full of it as usual. As I said, it'll take time....TFB for Southy if I don't meet his time table.


Here's an opener:


Nuclear Bombshell: $26 Billion cost — $10,800 per kilowatt! — killed Ontario nuclear bid
July 15, 2009
http://climateprogress.org/2009/07/1...shell-ontario/


Problems at the Davis-Besse nuclear reactor near Toledo are worse than expected

http://www.cleveland.com/business/in...vis-besse.html
Click to expand...

Southern Man said:
Your first link discusses high bid costs, but doesn't say what the cause of those high costs are, which are the inevitable lawsuits an delays by groups such as the one who wrote the gleefully worded article.

Whoa, hold the phone.....the high estimates come from assessing the actual amount construction, powering up, risk assessment, the actual return to investors, the actual cost to utility clients, etc. That's what the article is all about. You're supposition and conjecture about lawsuits is exactly that....supposition and conjecture. God damn, Southy! Are you so delusional to think that you can LIE about content of an article that others read? YOUR OPINION LOSES OUT TO FACT. Deal with it!

Your second link discusses failed inspections during a construction project. No fuel had leaked, and no one has died. Compare this to the oil rig issue that promulgated this thread.

Stay on subject, Libbie!
Click to expand...

I am on subject, it is YOU who knowingly distort and misrepresent the information in the articles.

The second link points to increasing problems with leaks of a nuke plant

The reactor has been shut down since Feb. 28 for what owner FirstEnergy Corp. initially thought would be a fairly routine refueling and safety inspection. There is no re-start date at this point because of the time-consuming repairs that have barely begun and the planned additional inspections..

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission dispatched a special inspection team to Davis-Besse weeks ago to keep an eye on the company inspections as well as its repairs. The team is also looking into how the company has operated the plant since federal authorities allowed it to restart in 2004.

The Union of Concerned Scientists, a watchdog group that does not oppose nuclear energy, has petitioned the NRC to force FirstEnergy to keep Davis-Besse shut down until it can prove the reactor can be safely operated.

The quesitons arise: who is going to pay for this? What is the alternative power source to the citizens while this plant is inactive? How will this affect their rates? Was there any low level contamination to workers in the plant where the leaks were contained? This goes hand in hand with an article that demonstrates the amazing cost estimates to decommission just one nuke plant.

You grade everything by the bigger disaster and it's immediate effect. When I showed information regarding nuke plant related deaths, illnesses and area contamination, YOU REFUSED TO READ THE INFORMATION. Now you're mis-reading and mis-representing what the two articles I presented contained. You continually display a dishonesty found in the arguments of neocon pundits, teabaggers, birthers and the like.

Get it together, Southy.
 
Last edited:
Taichiliberal said:
I am on subject, it is YOU who knowingly distort and misrepresent the information in the articles.

The second link points to increasing problems with leaks of a nuke plant

The reactor has been shut down since Feb. 28 for what owner FirstEnergy Corp. initially thought would be a fairly routine refueling and safety inspection. There is no re-start date at this point because of the time-consuming repairs that have barely begun and the planned additional inspections..

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission dispatched a special inspection team to Davis-Besse weeks ago to keep an eye on the company inspections as well as its repairs. The team is also looking into how the company has operated the plant since federal authorities allowed it to restart in 2004.

The Union of Concerned Scientists, a watchdog group that does not oppose nuclear energy, has petitioned the NRC to force FirstEnergy to keep Davis-Besse shut down until it can prove the reactor can be safely operated.

The quesitons arise: who is going to pay for this? What is the alternative power source to the citizens while this plant is inactive? How will this affect their rates? Was there any low level contamination to workers in the plant where the leaks were contained? This goes hand in hand with an article that demonstrates the amazing cost estimates to decommission just one nuke plant.

You grade everything by the bigger disaster and it's immediate effect. When I showed information regarding nuke plant related deaths, illnesses and area contamination, YOU REFUSED TO READ THE INFORMATION. Now you're mis-reading and mis-representing what the two articles I presented contained. You continually display a dishonesty found in the arguments of neocon pundits, teabaggers, birthers and the like.

Get it together, Southy.
Click to expand...

Again: Your first link discusses high bid costs, but doesn't say what the cause of those high costs are, which are the inevitable lawsuits and delays by groups such as the one who wrote the gleefully worded article.

Are you so delusional to think that you can LIE about content of an article that others read?
 
Southern Man said:
The same post where you said you were voting for Jesus but you called Him Charlie.
Click to expand...

Hahaha, that is pretty funny... but I did not do what he is accusing me of.

Id likely vote for Jesus. He was a man of the people and a supporter of the underclass. He dated a hooker, fed the poor and destroyed a church.
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
I am on subject, it is YOU who knowingly distort and misrepresent the information in the articles.

The second link points to increasing problems with leaks of a nuke plant

The reactor has been shut down since Feb. 28 for what owner FirstEnergy Corp. initially thought would be a fairly routine refueling and safety inspection. There is no re-start date at this point because of the time-consuming repairs that have barely begun and the planned additional inspections..

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission dispatched a special inspection team to Davis-Besse weeks ago to keep an eye on the company inspections as well as its repairs. The team is also looking into how the company has operated the plant since federal authorities allowed it to restart in 2004.

The Union of Concerned Scientists, a watchdog group that does not oppose nuclear energy, has petitioned the NRC to force FirstEnergy to keep Davis-Besse shut down until it can prove the reactor can be safely operated.
The quesitons arise: who is going to pay for this? What is the alternative power source to the citizens while this plant is inactive? How will this affect their rates? Was there any low level contamination to workers in the plant where the leaks were contained? This goes hand in hand with an article that demonstrates the amazing cost estimates to decommission just one nuke plant.

You grade everything by the bigger disaster and it's immediate effect. When I showed information regarding nuke plant related deaths, illnesses and area contamination, YOU REFUSED TO READ THE INFORMATION. Now you're mis-reading and mis-representing what the two articles I presented contained. You continually display a dishonesty found in the arguments of neocon pundits, teabaggers, birthers and the like.

Get it together, Southy.
Click to expand...

Southern Man said:
Again: Your first link discusses high bid costs, but doesn't say what the cause of those high costs are, which are the inevitable lawsuits and delays by groups such as the one who wrote the gleefully worded article.

Are you so delusional to think that you can LIE about content of an article that others read?
Click to expand...

Again, you keep LYING about the content of the article, and trying to replace it's information with your supposition and conjecture. Either that or your grade school reading comprehension is appalling. Pay attention:

The reactor has been shut down since Feb. 28 for what owner FirstEnergy Corp. initially thought would be a fairly routine refueling and safety inspection. There is no re-start date at this point because of the time-consuming repairs that have barely begun and the planned additional inspections..

Delays in refueling, not meeting safety inspection standards....just two of the reasons cited for costs increases. NOTHING about "lawsuits", as you theorize.

Then, like some silly high school kid, you parrot my writing style to try and mock me.

Grow the fuck up Southy.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Again, you keep LYING about the content of the article, and trying to replace it's information with your supposition and conjecture. Either that or your grade school reading comprehension is appalling. Pay attention:

The reactor has been shut down since Feb. 28 for what owner FirstEnergy Corp. initially thought would be a fairly routine refueling and safety inspection. There is no re-start date at this point because of the time-consuming repairs that have barely begun and the planned additional inspections..

Delays in refueling, not meeting safety inspection standards....just two of the reasons cited for costs increases. NOTHING about "lawsuits", as you theorize.

Then, like some silly high school kid, you parrot my writing style to try and mock me.

Grow the fuck up Southy.
Click to expand...

From your link now:
Sorry, no posts matched your criteria
Click to expand...
http://climateprogress.org/2009/07/1...shell-ontario/
:good4u:
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Again, you keep LYING about the content of the article, and trying to replace it's information with your supposition and conjecture. Either that or your grade school reading comprehension is appalling. Pay attention:

The reactor has been shut down since Feb. 28 for what owner FirstEnergy Corp. initially thought would be a fairly routine refueling and safety inspection. There is no re-start date at this point because of the time-consuming repairs that have barely begun and the planned additional inspections..

Delays in refueling, not meeting safety inspection standards....just two of the reasons cited for costs increases. NOTHING about "lawsuits", as you theorize.

Then, like some silly high school kid, you parrot my writing style to try and mock me.

Grow the fuck up Southy.
Click to expand...


Southern Man said:
From your link now:
Sorry, no posts matched your criteria
Click to expand...
http://climateprogress.org/2009/07/1...shell-ontario/
:good4u:
Click to expand...


Actually, it seems a link once placed in quotes sometimes will not connect. Going to the original post where the link was given should give you the proper connection. That way, you can't BS or lie your way out of being wrong.

http://climateprogress.org/2009/07/15/nuclear-power-plant-cost-bombshell-ontario/
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top