Edward Teller

Seriously, when you have hallucinatory visions of nuclear physicists in the dance wear of ballerinas while ill from influenza, chances are you are not altogether normal. I'm speaking of myself here.

Any ways, I thought I would write about nuclear policy, and its current resurgence in the last-gasp budget of President Bush. Oh, you didn't know that George W. Bush submitted his 2009 budget to congress? Well, he did.

Aside from the fact that the man has submitted a budget that is the first in history to surpass three trillion dollars, indeed, three point one trillion dollars, it also has some rather annoying provisions in it in regards to energy policy. Since energy policy is my particular fetish, I thought I would write a couple paragraphs about it.

Yes, I said fetish. Read a dictionary some time, and expand your grasp of the meaning of words. Not everything is sex, and we are not all thirteen years old.

Any ways, in George W. Bush's bloated and altogether insultingly wasteful budget, we have increases in funding for coal, nuclear, and biomass. We also see cuts to solar, hydrogen, and vehicle technology.

Now, I am not a fan of nuclear energy. Intellectually, I know that with over a hundred reactors in the United States with fifty years of operation, nuclear energy has probably killed less people than coal did in January. I also know that fourth generation nuclear reactors essentially eliminate the whole nuclear waste and fuel problem.

Yet, every time I think of nuclear power, I imagine permanent orange afros and all of the paint getting sucked off the side of my house. To say that nuclear energy has a P. R. problem is to be understated.

As for coal... coal plants pretty much are ATMs for the coal industry. You can assign whichever words for that acronym you would like. Seriously, for the coal executives, one set of words works, and for the folks downwind of the plant, an entirely different set of words works perfectly fine, as well.

Any ways, we do not need to subsidize coal in any way, manner, or fashion in this country. When geologists call certain parts of the carboniferous era the "Pennsylvanian epoch", one can assume that North America has a few pounds of coal lying around.

What needs to be done, is to monetize the carbon coming out of smokestacks and tailpipes. The coal and oil industries are so phenomenally profitable, the industries will learn how to make money off of sequestration and carbon offsets. Yes, India and China need to play ball too. When they see that North Americans are getting rich off of what was once considered waste, they'll fall in line.

Capitalism works. Mandates set by a single country or continent... don't.

Biomass... let's not bullshit ourselves. Biomass means corn ethanol. Corn ethanol is the biggest scam ever conceived by one set of human beings and perpetrated on the others. First off, butanol, a four carbon alcohol and pretty much identical to 87 octane, is ever so much better than fucking moonshine. Secondly, it is a 1 to 1.61 energy conversion. That is incredibly shitty. Algal biodiesel, fuck SOY biodiesel exceeds that quite considerably.

Do you have any idea how many more gallons per acre sugar beet ethanol produces compared to corn? I am writing this free-form, so I can't come up with it off of the top of my head, but I am going to tell you right now, it kicks corn ethanol's output in the nuts and calls it "Sally".

Finally, the budget cuts... CUTS funding to solar, hydrogen, and vehicle technology. Jesus Christ in a box car discussing Proust with a hobo. This is getting kind of long, so I am going to explain, in detail, why cutting funding to solar, hydrogen, and vehicle technology pisses me off to no end tomorrow.

Seriously, if The Shrub and Cheney resigned tomorrow, I would start carving their faces in to Rushmore next fucking week.