Solar powered Christmas lights come in a variety of types such as string lights, net lights, lawn stakes, and path lights.

In addition solar powered spotlights can be used to illuminate yard decorations.

Martial arts is the perfect alternative and your points are excellent. I may be snagging your post (giving credit of course) to help prove my point. Thanks for the insight!

And how nice to see sensible people speaking plain truths: “The reality is most buyers want power savings, not environmental ones.”

The other green alternatives need the same treatment. That is, what about the possible harmfull EMF exposures caused by all those wind turbines, solar power with inverters etc?

2. For a comparison of greenhouse-gas emissions from energy sources, please look at this.

3. 20 – 30 tonnes of waste is really very small, only a fraction of what a railroad boxcar can hold, and it can easily be isolated from the environment. In comparison, a coal-burning plant leaves hundreds of thousands of tons of toxic waste that can’t be isolated. Look here.

4. The statement that reactors can explode like atomic bombs is so obviously false that I’ll let you find your own references. If you read anything at all on the subject you’d realize that a remark like this one disqualifies anything else you might have to say. Even the accident at Three Mile Island, which destroyed the reactor, had no effect on the public or on the workers.

5. Your remarks on radioactive emissions also cost you credibility. Measurements near nuclear power plants show that people living there receive between three and six additional millirems of exposure.[Scientific American] In comparison, people in the US on average receive about 300 millirems from natural sources and another 60 from artificial sources. But living or working in a masonry building or living at a high elevation can increase a person’s exposure by hundreds of millirems. Studies show that these much larger variations have no effect on people’s health.[NRC] I can’t even guess where you got your misinformation about nuclear waste. If you read up on the subject you’ll see that the subject has been studied more minutely than any subject you can think of and that the programs being implemented are more comprehensive than exist for any other wastes.

6. The connection you make between nuclear energy and atomic weapons contradicts common sense, history, and expert opinion. Hans Blix was head of IAEA, the UN agency responsible for preventing proliferation. Here’s what he has to say [Blix]:

—A phasing out of nuclear power in some or all states would not lead to the scrapping of a single nuclear bomb.

—States can have nuclear weapons without nuclear power though it is not common today. Israel is a case in point. It has no nuclear power but is assessed to have some 200 nuclear warheads. For a long time China had only the weapons. Indeed, most nuclear weapons states, including the US, had weapons before they had power. —

7. No, there aren’t cheaper alternatives, as shown in Paragraph 1. Furthermore, the alternatives don’t operate most of the time. The simple truth is that we won’t shut down all the homes and businesses when there isn’t enough wind and sunlight to power them. We won’t make people stay in their cold, dark houses. If nuclear energy isn’t developed in a major way, the world will keep burning fossil fuels. Within fifty years nearly all the world’s people will live in severe hardship and the natural environment will have been irreversibly altered.