John Clark wrote:
>
> Mike Lorrey <mlorrey@datamann.com> Wrote:
>
> >Burning up that much plutonium would require the construction of some
> >breeder nuclear plants
>
> It would require the construction of nuclear plants but obviously nor breeders
> as you are not interested in making more of that crap. The decision was
> purely monetary, if he could get away with it by saying he killed the project
> for environmental reasons I'm sure he would have done so, he'd love to hide
> behind that banner, but he knew everybody would laugh at such a reason,
> including the environmentalists.
>
> >the sort of reactors that Clinton cancelled
>
> And Clinton was very wise to cancel the breeder reactor program.
Except that you can't burn up plutonium at any significant rate without
breeder reactors, John... and besides, building ANY nuclear plants would
obviously give great political capital to the democrats to use against
Bush. Ergo, my point is proven that Clintons Pu burning agreement was
another one of his land mines.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:14 MDT