With universities across the country having cut back on their nuclear engineering programs, including the U, America doesn't have the work force to manage all the new nuclear power plants that McCain wants to build. We can expect a lot of importation of foreign labor to build and operate these plants, particularly here in Utah. Will Republicans stand for this? We create an industry that only foreign workers are trained to do?

Nuts.
A nuclear power plant fuel ignorance, not worries.

And to the comment that we don't have a work force necessry to operate a power plant, if one is built, it will fuel the renewal of a local educated work force. There will be pleanty of time to do so, considering the time it will take to build one because of the nincompoops who will be whining and obstucting progress.

Why in the world don't we lay aside petty whining, ignorance, and fears and simply build one?

Put the nuclear waste on school trust land and help Utah education from the payments recieved.

Nuclear Power is among the safest forms of power, especially when new technology is used.

Is it perfect? no but coal power kills millions of people every year. It makes world wide news when ever nuclear power kills even 1 person, (which doesn't happen very often).

Utah pays teachers the lowest, which makes it hard to attract the very best teachers, Utah needs to raise teacher standards to keep the marginal and bad ones out, but needs to pay teachers more, to attract highly intelligent and competent to become teachers. Years ago, women didn't have many choices, but now they can become anything, so we have to pay competative wages for teachers unless we are satisfied with teaches who as a whole, are less intelligent than the average college graduate.

Otherwise we will continue to suffer from fads such as whole language and investigations math, because we will have teachers without the skills to tell a good program from a bad one.

Ignore the NIMBY's and just build the plant!

Thorium is the "Green" nuclear. Specifically LFTR (liquid fluoride thorium reactor).

Thorium based (rather than uranium based) nuclear power was demonstrate in the 50's and 60's but was abandoned because it was much harder to produce weapons grade material (compared to uranium). The military considerations favored the uranium fuel cycle.

thorium LFTR compared to uranium reactors:

have 100x more known fuel reserves (enough to power the USA for 1000s of yrs)
burn fuel 100x more efficiently without reprocessing
1000x less mining waste
~100x less radio active waste volume and waste needs storage for 10-300yrs not 10000yrs
no weapons grade material
are inherently safer (low pressure, can't explode)
more efficient (high temp)
should cost less (low pressure)
can be air cooled (don't need water)
can BURN UP URANIUM WASTE! no Yucca!

Sound to good to be true?

charlesH (BS Physics)
Orem, Utah