About two weeks ago, the word NIMBY popped back into my brain like a cartoon flashback.

No…it wasn’t the animated green eraser who moved at two frames per second with his "Pokey" equestrian friend.

That was Gumby.

NIMBY stands for "Not in My Back Yard!" It’s a useful acronym in many situations but especially where an individual is willing to admit that a particular project may provide certain benefits to the community so long as his own life is not disrupted.

We can all agree that international airports, maximum security prisons, waste processing facilities, paper mills and rescue missions have a valuable place in society but few of us would want them going up just beyond our wolmanized wooden fences.

Add to that list, power plants.

Not being of that mindset, I can only imagine the liberal angst that attacks the soul of most every environmentalist when he flips on the nightstand light to read "Earth in the Balance" by Al Gore or boots up his computer to write another nasty letter to the editor opposing nuclear power plants.

Perhaps they dwell in denial, realizing the power they consume comes from somewhere, and that’s fine…just so long as it’s not in their back yard.

Well, we’re running out of time and options when it comes to generating the power America needs. Things are quickly getting out of hand out west, where California Governor Gray Davis has seized the assets of two utilities, allowing electrical customers in his state to continue to benefit from exceptionally low cost power contracts…for now.

Meanwhile, the utilities are in court trying to get permission to overturn a state-imposed energy cap and raise rates to consumers.

You think the situation is limited to the West Coast? Guess again. Rising petroleum and natural gas prices are playing havoc with homeowners from the Midwest to the Mid-Atlantic regions. This winter’s cold weather has only made matters worse. In Iowa, some propane gas customers have seen heating costs rise by more than 400 percent.

Retirees on fixed incomes have even been forced to put their homes up for sale.

Because of our ongoing reliance on foreign oil to keep power generators going, any unexpected event, including a Middle East war, could quickly lead to not only gasoline rationing but electrical rationing. You can see why it makes no sense to rely on non-renewable resources like oil and gas to create electricity.

We’ve already made our case for nuclear power. It’s safe, clean, virtually limitless power. Uranium can be extracted from ocean water for about 200 to 400 dollars per pound. Plutonium can be recycled from decommissioned nuclear weapons. The cost per kilowatt hour is dirt cheap.

But as soon as many of us hear the phrase "nuclear power" we instantly go into NIMBY mode. Even if the powers that be could be resold on the advantages of nuclear power, local opposition is likely to be so fierce it would have little chance of succeeding… unless…

We build in Nevada.

Consider the advantages of putting up five, ten or twenty nuclear power plants in that one sparsely inhabited state. A smaller population means fewer residents to complain. Much of the land is already owned by the government and is useless or off-limits for other development. The financial benefits that could find their way back into the local economy could provide a bigger adrenaline boost than legalized gambling.

The whole NIMBY issue would go away overnight. And if environmentalists want to protest the plants, they’d have to dodge the rattlesnakes, gila monsters and armed federal guards to prove their point. I have a feeling that the security personnel who already look after such sensitive federal sites as Area 51 would shoot first and ask questions later.

The only issue that would need addressing is providing sufficient water for the plants’ cooling ponds, which might require a little extra thought given the hot, arid outback countryside of Nevada. But if the rocky desert of Israel can be made to bloom again, I think modern science could find a solution to this minor stumbling block.

My proposal may not be so wild, after all. The French Presse (AFP) ran a story last week stating that Russia plans to build 40 new nuclear reactors in the next 18 years to keep up with its energy requirements.

Obviously, the nuclear solution will work…if we have the will to implement it.

But whatever answer we adopt, it had better be quick. When it comes to alternative energy, we’re not only running out of alternatives.

We’re running out of time.

4.9¢ long distance from WebToday: Online sign-up takes 30 seconds