Pelosi will be w Gavin Newsom <strong>April 14th</strong>: Invited special guest, T-Third line grand opening celebration, Bayview Hunter's Point, San Francisco, California<br>http://www.pelosiwatch.org/article.php?id=2930 <br>This might be a place to launch a presence with a few signs; it is after all "Step It Up" Day http://stepitup2007.org/ and http://www.nowarnowarming.org/<br><br>They could say: Nancy Nuclear Power is not Clean Energy<br>Solar, Wind & Tidal Power Not Nuclear<br>Nancy Take Nuclear Power off the Table<br>etc.<br><br>Jim<br><br><b><i>Ann Garrison <anniegarrison@mac.com></i></b> wrote:<blockquote class="replbq" style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(16, 16, 255); margin-left: 5px; padding-left: 5px;"> Re Al Gore, and the revival of the nuclear power industry, which I <br>personally believe to be the main thing the Kyoto Protocol has <br>accomplished, besides the rise of mighty Nuclear Japan, which nobody <br>talks about, see Counterpunch: "How
Global Warming And Al Gore May <br>Rescue the Nuclear Power Industry":<br><br>http://www.counterpunch.org/nukes.html<br><br>On Apr 10, 2007, at 12:15 PM, nancy lewis wrote:<br><br>> Dear Jim,<br>><br>> I too read the article that all of the front<br>> runners, Give them Hell Hilary, Senator Obama and John<br>> Edwards and Speaker Pelosi, supports Nuclear Power<br>> plants as a way forward here, to help solve our energy<br>> crisis. This is the height of hypocrisy for these<br>> individuals who will not take any options of the table<br>> with regard to Iran and its generation of power from<br>> nuclear power plants to then turn around and want more<br>> nuclear power plants here. Nuclear power isn't<br>> "Green" technology. The Sierra club locally and our<br>> local peace groups need to get involved and visit<br>> Speaker Pelosi on this latest issue. B. Boxer isn't<br>> endorsing this and I'm not sure what A. Gore
is<br>> saying.<br>><br>> One of the many reasons I remain a Green is this<br>> issue. Nuclear power isn't a solution to the energy<br>> crisis anymore than continuing the occupation of Iraq<br>> will provide security to the Middle east by the US.<br>> Greens need to be educating the public locally about<br>> this extremely deadly, dangerous idea.<br>> Nancy Lewis<br>> lcuretiam2000@yahoo.com<br>><br>> --- Jim Dorenkott <jimdorenkott2@yahoo.com> wrote:<br>><br>>> Thanks for posting this. The pro-nuclear power<br>>> people are pushing hard. There is legislation in the<br>>> CA hopper to eliminate the 30+ year old ban on new<br>>> nuclear power plants. KGO talk host Dr. Bill<br>>> Wattenburg was ranting and organizing on behalf of<br>>> it Sunday night. Too many callers agreed with him. I<br>>> don't hear the correlative on our progressive<br>>> airwaves.<br>>><br>>> We
need an overarching coalition or network of<br>>> organizations who can begin responding. Locally here<br>>> we should form a working group or sub-working group<br>>> to connect with Sierra Club and other anti-nuclear<br>>> power forces to coalesce. Part of their strategy<br>>> should be visible visits to Pelosi's office to let<br>>> her know how out of step she is with her<br>>> constitutency on this.<br>>><br>>> I think we need to respond quickly to this.<br>>> Thoughts?<br>>><br>>> Jim<br>>><br>>> pamndave@speakeasy.net wrote: Just in case you were<br>>> wavering in your views of Nancy Pelosi:<br>>><br>>> Now nuclear power is "on the table." Of course,<br>>> impeaching our war crimal president is "off the<br>>> table."<br>>><br>>> (From the CommonDreams.org website)<br>>> Published on Monday, April 9, 2007 by Los Angeles<br>>>
Times<br>>> Pelosi, Clinton, Obama Favor More Nuclear Plants<br>>> by Richard Simon<br>>><br>>> WASHINGTON - The renewed push for legislation to cut<br>>> greenhouse gas emissions could falter over an old<br>>> debate: whether nuclear power should play a role in<br>>> any federal attack on climate change.Congress, with<br>>> added impetus from a Supreme Court ruling last week,<br>>> appears more likely to pass comprehensive energy<br>>> legislation. But nuclear power sharply divides<br>>> lawmakers who agree on mandatory caps on carbon<br>>> dioxide emissions. And it has pitted some on Capitol<br>>> Hill against their usual allies, environmentalists,<br>>> who largely oppose any expansion of nuclear power.<br>>><br>>> House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Barbara Boxer -<br>>> Bay Area Democrats with similar political views -<br>>> are on opposite
sides.<br>>><br>>> Pelosi used to be an ardent foe of nuclear power but<br>>> now holds a different view. ?I think it has to be on<br>>> the table,? she said.<br>>><br>>> Boxer, head of the Senate committee that will take<br>>> the lead in writing global warming legislation, said<br>>> that turning from fossil fuels to nuclear power was<br>>> ?trading one problem for another.?<br>>><br>>> Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Barack Obama (D-Ill.)<br>>> and Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) - all<br>>> presidential candidates - support legislation that<br>>> would cap greenhouse gas emissions and provide<br>>> incentives to power companies to build more nuclear<br>>> plants.<br>>><br>>> Opponents of nuclear power say that because a<br>>> terrorist attack on a plant could be catastrophic,<br>>> it makes no sense to build more potential targets.<br>>> And
radioactive waste still has no permanent burial<br>>> site, they say, despite officials? three decades of<br>>> trying to find one.<br>>><br>>> But attitudes toward nuclear power may be shifting<br>>> as a consensus emerges that greenhouse gases are<br>>> causing the world to heat up.<br>>><br>>> The Supreme Court added its voice, criticizing the<br>>> Bush administration for not acting to control<br>>> greenhouse gases.<br>>><br>>> Max Schulz, a former Energy Department staff member<br>>> who is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a<br>>> conservative think tank, said the ruling could help<br>>> ?spur the revival of nuclear power.?<br>>><br>>> And congressional Democratic leaders have made<br>>> passage of global warming legislation a priority.<br>>><br>>> ?I?ve never been a fan of nuclear energy,? said Sen.<br>>> Dianne Feinstein
(D-Calif.), who has called it<br>>> expensive and risky. ?But reducing emissions from<br>>> the electricity sector presents a major challenge.<br>>> And if we can be assured that new technologies help<br>>> to produce nuclear energy safely and cleanly, then I<br>>> think we have to take a look at it.?<br>>><br>>> The public?s attitude toward nuclear power is more<br>>> favorable when such energy is seen as part of an<br>>> effort to fight climate change. Polls over the years<br>>> have shown that a slim majority backs nuclear power,<br>>> but a Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg survey last summer<br>>> found that a larger majority, 61%, supported the<br>>> increased use of nuclear energy ?to prevent global<br>>> warming.?<br>>><br>>> Legislation introduced recently in California seeks<br>>> to repeal a 1976 ban on new nuclear plants in the<br>>>
state.<br>>><br>>> ?There?s no question that the attention to climate<br>>> change over the last several years has materially<br>>> changed the public discussion of nuclear power,?<br>>> said Jason Grumet, executive director of the<br>>> National Commission on Energy Policy, a bipartisan<br>>> group of energy experts. Given the threat of global<br>>> warming, he said, ?it?s hard to ignore the principal<br>>> source of noncarbon power generation in the country<br>>> today.?<br>>><br>>> One environmental group has tried to keep an open<br>>> mind. ?We don?t think any options should be taken<br>>> off the table when dealing with global warming,?<br>>> said Environmental Defense spokesman Charlie Miller.<br>>><br>>> The nuclear power industry in the U.S. has been at a<br>>> virtual standstill because of high construction<br>>> costs, regulatory uncertainties and
public<br>>> apprehension after a 1979 accident at Pennsylvania?s<br>>> Three Mile Island.<br>>><br>>> A number of plants ordered before the accident went<br>>> into operation. But many more were canceled after<br>>> one of the Three Mile Island reactors suffered a<br>>> partial meltdown and small amounts of radiation were<br>>> released into the atmosphere.<br>>><br>>> Reviving the industry has been a priority for<br>>> President Bush, who sees nuclear power as crucial to<br>>> meeting a growing demand for electricity.<br>>><br>>> The Nuclear Regulatory Commission expects to receive<br>>> applications for about two dozen new plants in the<br>>> next few years - in part because of provisions in a<br>>> 2005 energy bill designed to promote nuclear power.<br>>><br>>> Currently, 103 nuclear plants - including Diablo<br>>> Canyon near San Luis Obispo and San
Onofre in<br>>> northern San Diego County - generate about 20% of<br>>> the nation?s electricity.<br>>><br>>> The amount of congressional support for nuclear<br>>> power is unclear.<br>>><br>>> When McCain and Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) added<br>>> subsidies for nuclear power to their 2005 bill to<br>>> cut greenhouse gas emissions, they lost support from<br>>> environmentalists and votes in Congress, including<br>>> Boxer?s.<br>>><br>>> McCain said he had no idea whether he would be more<br>>> successful this time. But he said there was ?no way<br>>> that you could ever seriously attack the issue of<br>>> greenhouse gas emissions without nuclear power, and<br>>> anybody who tells you differently is not telling the<br>>> truth.?<br>>><br>>> On Capitol Hill last month, former Vice President Al<br>>> Gore, who has become a leading advocate for
swift<br>>> action on climate change, said he saw nuclear plants<br>>> as a ?small part? of the strategy.<br>>><br>>> ?They?re so expensive, and they take so long to<br>>> build, and at present they only come in one size:<br>>> extra large,? he said.<br>>><br>>> ?And people don?t want to make that kind of<br>>> investment in an uncertain market for energy<br>>> demand.?<br>>><br>>> The McCain-Lieberman bill, which seeks to reduce<br>>> greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 to a third of 2000<br>>> levels, would provide federal loans or guarantees to<br>>> subsidize as many as three advanced reactor<br>>> projects.<br>>><br>>> The U.S. Public Interest Research Group and Public<br>>> Citizen said the bill would authorize more than $3.7<br>>> billion in subsidies for new nuclear plants.<br>>><br>>> Sen. Thomas R. Carper (D-Del.), a cosponsor of
the<br>>> McCain-Lieberman legislation, thinks support for<br>>> nuclear power could bring more votes.<br>>><br>>> ?Three or four years ago, if you included nuclear,<br>>> you lost more than you gained,? he said. ?Today ?<br>>> you pick up more than you lose.?<br>>><br>>> But nuclear power faces huge political and economic<br>>> obstacles.<br>>><br>> === message truncated ===><br>> _______________________________________________<br>>> San Francisco Green Party Active Members List<br>>> To unsubscribe or edit your options, go here:<br>>><br>> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/active<br>>><br>><br>> _______________________________________________<br>> San Francisco Green Party Active Members List<br>> To unsubscribe or edit your options, go here:<br>>
https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/active<br><br></jimdorenkott2@yahoo.com></blockquote><br><p> 
<hr size=1>Now that's room service! <a href="http://travel.yahoo.com/hotelsearchpage;_ylc=X3oDMTFtaTIzNXVjBF9TAzk3NDA3NTg5BF9zAzI3MTk0ODEEcG9zAzIEc2VjA21haWx0YWdsaW5lBHNsawNxMS0wNw--
">Choose from over 150,000 hotels <br>in 45,000 destinations on Yahoo! Travel</a> to find your fit.