[wildsage]

Originally Posted by greg_the_great

But regardless, the nuclear waste is easy, space is big, toss it out.

a) what do you use for an energy source to get it beyond Earth's gravity?
b) do you want to be downwind if the launch vehicle explodes? (hint: round planet, we're all downwind)

Originally Posted by greg_the_great

As for oil, I see you are up on the talking points of GW, but not finding solutions. Solar and wind will never produce enough energy to continue the world in growth. I personally don't want to go without. I am all for new energy sources, but you offer nothing new. Wind mills were around long before oil. Flat out, does not do it.

It's easy to say the alternatives don't work when they haven't instituted them on a large scale. Again, take those hundreds of thousands of miles of powerlines, put solar panels where there's a lot of sun and put wind turbines where there is a lot of wind -- the wires are already there, mounting towers, too. Any percentage of fossil fuel or nuke power you can displace is a benefit; my guess is 20% would be a pretty easy start. Often overlooked is the reduction in electrical consumption just by efficiency. You can thank the "greens" that your a/c & fridge use less kw than they did years ago. The average US household could reduce energy use 20% and most of them 50% without impeding our affluent lifestyles. Any non-renewable source you don't waste will be there for your kids to waste.
Storage is a concern with solar & wind but batteries work well on the small scale and hydrogen electrolysis is another solution. (And even in your wildest dreams, metals & acid from batteries can never be as bad as nuke waste: you still have the heavy metals, you still have the caustic chemical, plus you add radioactivity to the mix.)

Originally Posted by greg_the_great

Reactor do. And they solve your little problem of carbon footprints, which is theory as well.

Actually, carbon-based energy is used throughout the nuke cycle: mining & refining the ore, transporting fuel & components, the huge amounts of concrete poured.
In addition to the waste problem and aside from any potential accidents, there is also a lifespan issue: critical metals bombarded with neutrons suffer "embrittlement" which is just what it sounds like. Presently virtually all reactors that were licensed for 30 years of operation have been relicensed for another 30 years -- that cuts into their "over-engineered" safety margin. And eventually they will need to be decommissioned, which means more radioactive waste to deal with.
And if the pro-nuke lobby is sucessful, an increased number of generating stations may cause waste heat from cooling requirements to become an issue.

Originally Posted by greg_the_great

... you can possibly say that carbon footprints are real, but it is just theory on if they has anything to do with GW. Also, still waiting for you prove you claim the Gore's movie was accurate.

Carbon dioxide IS a greenhouse gas whether you choose to believe it or not; that is NOT a theory. While there is dispute over some aspects of Gore's movie -- some of it valid -- the science of global warming (the components & interactions, the natural phenomena) is truthful; if you choose to leave aside whether humans are making it worse, it is still a good illustration of earth science.

Originally Posted by greg_the_great

I just like the solar links. Mainly cause they are showing the activity of the Sun, which is the major cause of cooling and warming of the planet.

How does the sun cool the planet?

Originally Posted by greg_the_great

And for all the "big oil" statements, all your arguments are from people that will make large amount off of the hopes that we will kill ourselves.

WTF? Cadaver sales?

Originally Posted by greg_the_great

The issue is profits.

As I've said, if oil prices rise high enough, they will tap more expensive sources for it and you will keep paying more for what you choose not to do without.

Originally Posted by greg_the_great

Offer a reasonable solution that makes sense and the argument stops.

I doubt it, some stupidity is incredibly persistent.