wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

Comments

• [1] Emily Sack from Ossining, NY January 17, 2008 - 10:28AM

  Brian, Love your show. Please check out the following website, http://www.joannamacy.net/, and look at her proposal for nuclear guardianship.

  Best,

  Emily

  
  
• [2] Eric from B'klyn January 17, 2008 - 10:29AM

  How does France dispose of its waste?

  
  
• [3] Tracey Gowa January 17, 2008 - 10:29AM

  Please tell Mr. Riccio that rudeness in a debate cannot help his case.

  
  
• [4] Music Lover from NJ January 17, 2008 - 10:30AM

  Who is that guy... listen and challenge dude, don't be so rude.

  
  
• [5] adsfa January 17, 2008 - 10:30AM

  Worst case scenario for carbon making fuel is end of world/global warming.

  Worst case scenario for nuclear fuel?

  Is there another way of viewing the risks?

  
  
• [6] Paul from NJ January 17, 2008 - 10:32AM

  Speaking as a lifetime Greenpeace supporter, I have to say that the Greenpeace guy's attitude in this discussion isn't going to win any converts.

  
  
• [7] Scotty Watson from Weehawken NJ January 17, 2008 - 10:34AM

  These are two guests who should NEVER be on NPR again. They were rude, off topic,talking over each other, ignoring the host. This is NPR, not Don Imus.

  
  
• [8] Emily from Brooklyn January 17, 2008 - 10:39AM

  Yeah, but she is one of the worst guests I have ever heard on this show. You wouldn't know that she has written a book on the subject; she provides little information to back up her claims and generally sounds poorly prepared.

  By the way, I'm getting ready to stop listening to this show unless Brian stops referring to the three lead candidates as "the only candidates." It is factually incorrect and extremely irksome. They may not have real chances to win the nomination, but there are two other candidates running and the New York Primary is weeks away. Besides, they both bring up important issues, and clearly Kucinich's position on nuclear power is relevant to today's show.

  
  
• [9] Paulo from Paterson, New Jersey January 17, 2008 - 10:41AM

  Well, I think the Gwyneth Cravens started to do that because of Riccio. He was being belligerent from the beginning whereas she became increasingly so as he continued to push her. I don't blame her.

  
  
• [10] RA January 17, 2008 - 10:42AM

  Lousy segment. It didn't tell us anything useful. Find a more objective person to give us the facts, not 2 diametrically opposed persons who pick and choose facts to fit their arguments: perhaps a nuclear scientist from a university without connections to the industry who can provide the truth about both sides. There are plusses and minuses on this issue and getting diametrically opposed persons to speak on it doesn't inform the electorate.

  
  
• [11] Annie from NJ January 17, 2008 - 10:45AM

  Jim Riccio may be Greenpeace's nuclear analyst, but he is so boorish that he totally lost my respect. I couldn't even hear anything he said because of his lousy attitude. If he wants to be effective in promoting his knowledge, and persuasive in his arguments, he should work on his public speaking skills. If this is the best person Greenpeace has to speak on this matter, I'm unimpressed by their culture.

  After listening to this program I don't know what I think about nuclear energy, or which presidential candidate would be the best defender of We, the People; neither argument persuaded me. "But, nobody died," is a wimpy statement when talking about escaping nuclear waste that could continue to do damage to the environment for years to come. "Check your facts," is an arrogant, bullying way to talk, especially when Mr. Riccio didn't seem to have his own facts at hand nor was he able to keep on topic.

  Maybe Americans should just learn to live with less electricity. Then they wouldn't have to worry about building more energy plants. Has anyone thought of that? Of course, it's not the American way... extravagance and wastefulness is a more accurate definition of how the rest of the world sees the people of this country.

  
  
• [12] Max Z. January 17, 2008 - 10:46AM

  Nuclear power is not absolutely safe, clean or efficient, but it is much safer, cleaner and more efficient than any other source with the same capacity. Nuclear has proven to be safer than any other power source when all variables are taken into the account. Arguing against nuclear is akin to arguing that cars are safer than airplanes. We need energy, and nuclear power offers a relatively safer, cleaner, safer and independent source.

  PS, Greenpeace needs to re-evaluate their position. The real choice is coal/oil vs nuclear, no matter how angry one gets.

  
  
• [13] Scotty Watson from Weehawken NJ January 17, 2008 - 10:57AM

  I agree that Mr. Riccio, "started it." No question, his behavior was inexcusable. Far more suitable for Bill O'Reilly than for Brian Lehrer. He undermined his own argument by being a boor. But Ms Cravens took the bait. Had she been listening to Mr. Lehrer, he could have helped her get her point across without the over-talking. He's a good host and would have shut down Mr. Riccio if given the chance.

  
  
• [14] niyi from harlem January 17, 2008 - 11:02AM

  my observations she came unprepared..he was overtly aggressive..end of story

  
  
• [15] Paulo from Paterson, New Jersey January 17, 2008 - 11:03AM

  Well, I think solar could be a viable alternative as well if we invested more money in the technology. We're on the verge of a breakthrough to make the panels cheaper and more efficient, and we need to nurture that breakthrough.

  The planet, through it's entire existence, has been fueled by the sun. All life on earth is dependent on the sun, and food chains are essentially just a means of extracting a usable form of the sun's power. It should be a viable source of energy for our machines as well as our bodies.

  
  
• [16] Charles Warner from Manhattan January 17, 2008 - 11:18AM

  Never have those people on your show again. You should have thrown them off the air. There have to be consequences for guests who do not pay attention to what you tell them is acceptable, courteous behavior. I had to turn off the program because it was so irritating.

  
  
• [17] RC from queens January 17, 2008 - 01:58PM

  The best person I have heard on the pro-nuke side is Dr. Bill Watenberg of KGO radio in San Fransisco.

  
  
• [18] PW from Chicago, IL January 17, 2008 - 04:32PM

  Is Gwyneth Craven working for the Obama campaign?

  
  
• [19] John from NC January 24, 2008 - 08:06PM

  Cravens comments were much more substantive, when she wasn't being shouted over by Riccio, who was awful - a completely unprofessional jerk.

  
  
• [20] gordon eatman from new mexico February 07, 2008 - 01:11AM

  I understand Mr Ricco's passion as we are again being sold another bad deal much worse than Iraq. 1) still no safe disposal ( France is having to ship its waste to Russia 2) 10 years min.to bring these massive beh. on line so little effect on carbon till way past 2020 3) grow up and learn to live on less energy it not so bad check out RMI 4) reduce uncontroled world population , we live way beyond the earth's holding capacity , which strains the enviroment 5) reprocessing the waste as touted as "endless souce of fuel" yields weapons grade plutonium ( security issues)which has been giving France major polution/ cancer clusters close to the reprocessing plant and is in decline as to the major cost expenses ( cheaper to not reprocess): FRENCH NUCLEAR REPROCESSING –

  FAILURE AT HOME, COUP d’ETAT IN THE UNITED STATES

  
  
• [21] Chris O from New York April 11, 2008 - 01:11PM

  It is NOT NPR. It is WNYC.