What You May Have Missed
Most Popular
Across Site
In Opinion
- Doug Robinson: Utah man's new running shoe...
- Letters: Threats justified
- Timothy R. Clark: Graduation advice for my...
- Snapshot of 2013 in political cartoons
- My view: Nothing sinister about Common Core
- State pensions threaten to bleed states dry
- In our opinion: A darkening cloud is hanging...
- In our opinion: New leader in Iran, but...
Most Commented
Across Site
In Opinion
- Letters: Stop the witch hunt
35 - John Florez: Show leadership on...
31 - Supreme Court, Congress, citizens: The...
27 - Letter: Media failure
25 - Robert Bennett: Sticking to facts is...
23 - Letters: Threats justified
23 - In our opinion: Limit the power of the...
18 - Doug Robinson: Utah man's new running...
17



If your're concerned about CO2, nuclear power is the answer. It's the only clean energy source big enough to meet demand.
To "Sensible Scientist" you forgot to mention that nuclear power is also a green power source because its waste product can be recycled into new fuel and generate more power. Also, one of the original founders of Greenpeace or the Sierra Club (I can't remember which) fully endorses it.
Actually, I don't think my phone and computer take an 'astounding' amount of energy to keep working. It takes time to charge things, but not necessarily a lot of energy. Modern electronic devices are really efficient. True, there are a lot of 'em these days, but they're such low power units it's amazing. I remember when offices had one big IBM selectric typewriter and an incandescent desk lamp. Todays' office space often has 15 or more gadgets plugged in at once for one person but uses less power than the 'good old days'.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
— About comments