Nevada Temporary: Fill & Download for Free

In most cities you will be restricted, however, I just returned from “a major arts festival” in a temporary city in the desert of Nevada. Temporary cities lack the normal protection laws…For the first time ever we had a rouge parker pull a pickup truck into our theme camps boundary, which was scheduled to be 100% FULL of vehicles as we have to do detailed scale plans to coordinate all the vehiles, tents, shade structures… etc.Thankfully there were no end of big trucks and the playa dust allowed the F150 to be pulled out into the “street”, where we dutifully reported the illegally parked vehicle to the first BLM (Federal Government) patrol that came down the main street. They towed the vehicle well out of town, where I'm sure it took the owner HOURS to locate, cost hundreds in tow fees AND they now are a known illegal parker and may not be issued a vehicle pass for next year's burn. Not a huge issue, as these are often resold at cost.

This questions is trickier than you might think, and because of that I’m going to give a very different answer from what you’d expect.It supposes that Republicans must lose one seat.It supposes further that this is a seat they currently hold.Lastly, it supposes that this is a seat up for reelection this November.With this in mind, which seat would they least mind losing?You might think that they would prefer to lose the seat of the colleague they despise the most. That would be Cruz. But this fails to reflect two things:Cruz has actually made his peace with the establishment since 2016. He is no longer doing things designed to make Ted Cruz look good while making the establishment look effete and insufficiently conservative.Texas is getting less and less red as time passes. Senatorial terms are long. 6 years is an eternity with our changing demographics. Winning Cruz’s seat back from an incumbent Democrat will be harder in 2024 than keeping it with an incumbent Republican in 2018.You might think they would prefer to lose the least Republican seat they currently hold. That would be Dean Heller’s in Nevada. He barely won in 2012. Now it is true that there was a spoiler candidate from the Independent American Party of Nevada, and that Heller’s victory might have been bigger than his less than 1% margin otherwise. Still, Nevada is a state where Democrats routinely win statewide office. And the state is also getting bluer. This is not a seat where Republicans will want to face a Democratic incumbent in 2024, especially given that it will be a presidential election year, where the turnout will be higher.So, I don’t think they would want to lose either of those seats.My way of seeing this problem is that they would probably prefer to lose the reddest seat. Why? Because it would be the easiest seat to recapture. Republicans are, rightly, not worried about having lost the Alabama seat. They know that it’s temporary, and that the next Republican nominee, as long as he is not a despicable human being, will defeat Doug Jones.The seat that would meet this criterion is that of John Barrasso in Wyoming. The state is so Republican that he won his last election with 75.9% of the vote. If Republicans were to lose this seat, it would be because of a fluke event that would not be replicable in 2024.That’s my vote, then.

Virtually every scientific group that has examined this question has concluded that nuclear waste is best stored deeply buried in rock. In the United States, there is one proposed facility to do this at Yucca Mountain Nevada, but work on it was cancelled by President Obama because of objections from the state of Nevada. Work has not resumed, and the US OMB (Office of Management and Budget) has estimated that the facility will cost $96 billion to complete.The problem is getting more severe every year. There are currently 80,000 tons of such waste, currently stored in temporary facilities above ground at the nuclear reactors. One out of every three US citizens lives within 50 miles of such a nuclear waste facility.My daughter Elizabeth and I have a new company that proposes to dispose of the nuclear waste in a deeper, safer, and less expensive manner. We have formed a company Deep Isolation to obtain a license to contract with the US Department of Energy to do this. We take advantage of the fact that nuclear waste is enormously compact, and can fit easily into narrow (8 to 12 inch) drillholes. We take advantage of directional drilling technology perfected over the past two decades. The waste will be stored in long horizontal sections of the drillhole. Three such drillholes can dispose of a lifetime of nuclear waste from a gigawatt nuclear reactor. In some cases, the drillholes can be on-site at the reactor, thus eliminating most of the risk of transport.The best introduction to our method is probably the YouTube technology video we put together:A longer video contains interviews with me, Elizabeth (my daughter and CEO of Deep Isolation), former Secretary of Energy (and Nobel Laureate) Steve Chu, and others:There is a great deal of written analysis at our website: Home - Deep Isolation.We decided to develop this as a private company, rather than simply recommend it to the US Government, because we felt it is more likely to move forward if we did so.If you’d like to see the case we make to investors, you can look at this link: Deep Isolation Inc on Crowdfunder