ozzman99_nice, but innacurate. We should not be storing waste underground ever. The waste should be re-enriched so it can be used again, but not every nuclear plant has this feature. Nuclear will never be clean and I don't see you as being part of the solution-only part of the problem. Are you doing anything to help with conservation of natural resources or are you just posting and complaining about those that do?

GreenGina8: If nuclear is soooo bad why can europe and Japan use it for most of their electricity needs and we can't? Its because we have a place to dispose of nuclear waste its called Yucca Mountain in Nevada but environmental wackos like you have helped in delaying it every time. Why? Because once you remove the waste issue you have nothing left. Chernobyl... Ha that was a piece of junk built by the soviets with no safety measures, Three mile island... The containment structure did its job and guess what.. it contained the partial meltdown. The avergae radiation exposure at three mile island was equal to one chest x-ray. Environmental hippies ultimate goal is not finding alternative energy it is returing us to the stone age to save "mother earth". Every option has been trashed by environmental hippies. Wind turbines are unslightly and kill birds, hydroelectric screws up fish migration, solar takes up too much space and might kill an endangered toad, nuclear is too dangerous and costly to build blah blah blah. If scientists ever crack the nuclear fusion code you will find something to complain about that as well.

I would love to have a nuclear plant within city limits. Just ask the people of Byron, Il about the jobs and tax revenue that comes from it. They can build in my backyard

greengina8: Concerning these "barrels" of nuclear waste, the U.S. needs to reprocess its waste to extract even more clean energy. The small remaining material is turned into a stable glass log, this is done through the vitrification process. We can then "stimulate" the economy and build a waste storage site in Adams County, it would be an improvement. 20% of the countries power comes from nuclear. Solar is o.k. for residential applications, high initial expense. Wind. Are you kidding me, greengina8, where does the power come from when the wind stops blowing. You cannot store power from a large wind turbine. On a cloudy day with no wind, one might reconsider the red headed stepchild that is nuclear.

Uh, Alliant just shut down the coal plant because demand was down, so why would they need to build another?

greengina8 - Doing the research would make you sad when you found out exactly what it would take to replace fossil fuel energy with "green" energy. It simply isn't possible due to the exponential growth of energy consumption. Don't let any study fool you either, because most will state "at present rate of consumption", which is misleading.

MrScott - If we had your WARP technology we could do that, but our current technology would cost too much. Besides, the aliens would turn the Earth into a prison for contaminating outer space.

The site needs way too much environmental cleanup to become a water park. Plus, no one in their right mind is going to fund a water park in this economy. Even with $10 Tuesdays, the Rockford water park is having trouble pulling in people.

Greengina8 wins by a landslide so far, I'll check back later!

Put the spent plutonium on rockets and blast it into space where it will continue on and on and not bother anyone. Problem solved.

Nuclear energy is not clean technology; think of the barrels of toxic waste that cannot be disposed of safely. Burying them in the ground is neither safe nor sane. GM should be turned into a waterpark, not a nuclear facility. Imagine the tourism $$$ a thing like this could generate. I remember not too long ago people were practically jumping out of their skin to have a waterpark in Janesville.

Solar power is clean. Hydrothermal power is (mostly)clean. Wind energy is clean. placebo-check your facts on toxic waste from nuclear powerplants anywhere but Wikipedia; try starting with the EPA and DNR websites, or google the WI administration codes on protection and preservation of natural resources-including storage and disposal of hazardous waste.

Yes and yes Rookie. The sooner this city can start singing "He stopped loving her today", with regards to GM and the plant, the sooner life can move on. Standby. If you want to roll the dice on a major employer with that form of commitment, good luck. Nuclear is the only RELIABLE, SAFE, (yes safe), and CAPABLE form of electrical production. All of you Red Scare, 3 Mi. Island and Chernobyl worryworts can put a sock in it. Look at all time numbers of deaths involving nuclear and coal, and then get back to me. I've listened to residents of Two Rivers beg for more nuclear development. If it was so big and bad, why would people who live a couple miles away promote it?

build a nuke plant at the site of the gm plant.you have the river and the infrustructure all ready there for the power lines.if gm wont give up the building you know they are coming back,everyone wins,