Article
I just liked this article for the comments. Like someone said, 5 electoral votes cost the economy a lot. I wonder if we could put a price tag on Reid. I'd say something like 50 billion, but that is nothing compared to the trillions going down the drain. At least McCain says they shouldn't continue the sham they have someplace to put the waste, and stop collecting the fees. And new nuclear plant proposals shouldn't trot out the DOE contract, as though they actually have someone to deal with the waste. They should just be honest and say that they have no place for the waste, except to pile it high in rusty Obama Barrels until Hell freezes over.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
NB Nuclear Late
Article
6 months late. Not bad. I always thought it was a good nuclear project if it was twice as expensive, and twice as long, but still worked. This place has one strike against it, in that they dropped the new rotors, and had to use the old crap. Thus, it isn't going to put out as much juice.
6 months late. Not bad. I always thought it was a good nuclear project if it was twice as expensive, and twice as long, but still worked. This place has one strike against it, in that they dropped the new rotors, and had to use the old crap. Thus, it isn't going to put out as much juice.
Small Earthquake in California - Nobody Cares
Article
The only thing I picked up on this article was that it had to be on a known fault, and if it wasn't, it was on an unknown fault. Since it was small, and in a forest, they weren't looking.
California is riddled with known and unknown faults. There is almost a religious feeling that the next earthquake will be on a known fault. But faults are everywhere! Most likely, it isn't right on the San Andreas, but an 'offshoot'. They aren't allowed to build right beside a known fault, but must offset by x number of metres.
I wonder when they will give up on this, and 'fuzz up' the fault zones a bit. Your chance of damage is more related to your foundation, anyway. There is very little chance of the surface expression splitting your house apart.
(I'm just having some fun with those California guys, don't mind me!)
ps. My readership has suddenly gone way up, but ad clicks are in the toilet. I have mixed feelings.
The only thing I picked up on this article was that it had to be on a known fault, and if it wasn't, it was on an unknown fault. Since it was small, and in a forest, they weren't looking.
California is riddled with known and unknown faults. There is almost a religious feeling that the next earthquake will be on a known fault. But faults are everywhere! Most likely, it isn't right on the San Andreas, but an 'offshoot'. They aren't allowed to build right beside a known fault, but must offset by x number of metres.
I wonder when they will give up on this, and 'fuzz up' the fault zones a bit. Your chance of damage is more related to your foundation, anyway. There is very little chance of the surface expression splitting your house apart.
(I'm just having some fun with those California guys, don't mind me!)
ps. My readership has suddenly gone way up, but ad clicks are in the toilet. I have mixed feelings.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)