Rare is the day I'll sell an electric power generation play, particularly nuclear power. Unlike France, the United States frittered away an opportunity to create a 21st century power generation system 30 years ago, and it will now play catch-up for 20 years, and nuclear will be a part of the solution.

Entergy Corp. (NYSE: ETR), the second largest nuclear power generator in the U.S., will be a part of that mix. It is performing as expected, which is why I'm reiterating my Buy rating for the company's shares, first recommended on May 12, 2009 at a price of $74.31.

The market giveth and the market taketh away -- all in the same day. I was looking at how Shaw Group (NYSE: SGR) performed on Thursday. The company, an engineering firm that provides services relating to the energy and environmental industry for both the government and the private sector, was up 5.6% at the close of trading yesterday, powered by superb volume. But, in the after-hours session, it went down nearly 6.4%.

And, yes, the sell-off was on the back of an earnings report. For the third quarter, Shaw Group made 57 cents per share, excluding its acquisition of Westinghouse. The company made 67 cents per share in last year's similar quarter, also adjusted for the acquisition. Net sales were essentially flat.

This post is part of a series in which TheStockAdvisors.com asked financial experts to name their top stock pick if McCain or if Obama wins the election.

"John McCain has said that nuclear power must be part of a plan to address climate change and reduce our dependence on foreign oil; to benefit from this plan, buy Shaw Group (NYSE: SGR), which constructs and maintains nuclear power plants," says Paul Tracy in his Street Authority Market Advisor.

"Today, nearly half of U.S. electricity is created via conventional coal-fired plants. This made sense for us for decades -- coal is so cheap and plentiful here that the United States is often referred to as the Saudi Arabia of coal.

"However, in the past few years, the tide of public sentiment has shifted against the energy source. Primarily this is due to the emissions created by burning coal for electricity.

"In addition to the well known release of carbon dioxide, coal emissions also contain traces of mercury. On top of that, the rise of China and other emerging markets has led to higher costs for coal.

"So with a public that is increasingly interested in alternative sources of electricity and a president who is committed to increasing nuclear power usage, the companies that build and maintain nuclear plants sit in the perfect position to benefit.

"In particular, I think Louisiana-based Shaw Group is a stock to watch. SGR's largest end market is the construction and maintenance of power plants, including both plants fired by fossil fuels and nuclear facilities.

"The company also owns a 20% stake in Westinghouse Electric, one of the world's leading designers and builders of nuclear power plants.

This post is part of a series in which TheStockAdvisors.com asked financial experts to name their top stock pick if McCain or if Obama wins the election.

"If McCain is elected, we would suggest USEC (NYSE: USU); after slumbering for over 20 years, nuclear power is quickly emerging from hibernation and will be satisfying a much larger percentage of the nation's energy-hungry appetite during McCain administration," says value investor Nathan Slaughter, editor of Half-Priced Stocks.

"Currently, there are 104 nuclear plants in operation nationwide, which combined, account for 20% of the country's electricity. But both of those totals are set to rise markedly. Current forecasts suggest nuclear facilities could double their share and ultimately account for 40% of power in the U.S.

"There are several factors underpinning this resurgence in nuclear energy, not the least of which is $100 per barrel oil and elevated prices for natural gas and coal.

"Believe it or not, one kilogram of uranium-235 has the stored energy equivalent of 1,500 tons of coal. And while up-front construction expenses can be high, ongoing operating costs for nuclear reactors are running just $15-20 per megawatt hour, far cheaper than traditional plants.

"John McCain is an outspoken champion for the nuclear power movement, outlining ambitious plans to commit $315 billion towards the construction of 45 new reactors over the next two decades.

"Beyond that, he has a clear goal of achieving energy independence by building '100 new plants to power the homes and factories and cities of America.'

"All of this spells plenty of opportunity for USEC, owner of the nation's only uranium enrichment facility. The company is in the business of supplying fuel for commercial reactors around the world -- and competition is sparse.

"The firm also benefits from a longstanding nuclear non-proliferation treaty with Russia. Specifically, USEC participates in the salvaging of old Soviet nuclear warheads under the 'Megatons to Megawatts' program.

"The company has carved out a dominant market share and now supplies about half of the nation's enriched uranium (most of the rest comes from Russia).

This post is part of a series in which TheStockAdvisors.com asked financial experts to name their top stock pick if McCain or if Obama wins the election.

"McCain has been a strong supporter of nuclear power and his energy plan calls for building 45 new nuclear power plants in the U.S. by 2030; our pick for a McCain victory is uranium miner Paladin Resources (Toronto: PDN)," says Elliott Gue in The Energy Strategist.

"McCain's plan would represent by far the most significant build-out of nuclear plants in more than three decades. He has an ultimate goal of building 100 new U.S. reactors. America's 104 existing plants account for about 20% of electricity generation.

"The U.S. is not the only country in the world considering a major expansion in nuclear power. Russia, India and China have already committed to a major expansion of their nuclear energy capacity. And nuclear is also enjoying a renaissance in other developed markets such as the U.K. and Italy.

"The main fuel for nuclear plants is uranium. Last year, mined uranium supplies only covered about 64% of global uranium demand; to make up the difference, utilities tapped secondary sources such as stockpiles and reprocessed nuclear warheads.

"But, secondary supplies are expected to decline sharply in coming years and the Megatons to Megawatts program for reprocessing Russian nuclear weapons into power plant fuel ends in 2013. Therefore, mined supply will have to ramp up to meet rapidly growing demand.

"The positive side to any correction is that it brings valuations down to earth for stocks you may have thought were out of your reach," says Genia Turanova.

The contributing editor to Stephen Leeb's The Complete Investor explains, the "Along with the energy sell-off, unregulated utilities have declined even more-to bargain levels." Here's a look at Florida-based FPL Energy (NYSE: FPL).

"FPL is one of our favorite alternative energy holdings. And with the recent selloff, its yield once again qualify the stock as a legitimate full-fledged income plays.

"And as its quarterly results indicate, the unregulated utility is relatively immune to the nation's slowdown, making them among the surest growers in the marketplace today.

"The skies over the Sunshine State have been quite dark because of the housing sector's woes and the subsequent credit crunch. As a result, the Florida-based company's adjusted earnings per share increased 'only' 8% on a year-over-year basis.

Many energy experts are looking to clean-burning coal as an alternative to crude. If that works out, the price of oil could come down as the US and other big countries like China move to the old source of energy that is becoming attractive again.

But the cost of getting clear-coal to market may be too high for it to be practical. According to The New York Times, "the failure to start building, testing, tweaking and perfecting carbon capture and storage means that developing the technology may come too late to make coal compatible with limiting global warming."

Do those problems really rule coal out as a big source of energy? Maybe not. The decisions to fight dependence on oil may involve some very hard compromises. Oil-based energy hurts the environment. Ethanol drives up corn prices at a time when commodity inflation is already pushing food prices much higher.Governments and individuals are going to have to decide whether cutting the need for oil is worth additional pollution or whether $5 gas is a better way forward.

The same argument is beginning to move to nuclear power. There are fears that this source of energy may be too dangerous because nuclear power plants sometimes have dangerous leaks. But nuclear can provide a huge portion of the electricity needs of many nations, as France has already shown.

With oil at $120 or more, energy consumers can't have it both ways. The days of cheap energy are gone, and the age of cheap, clean energy may be years away. In between, the trade-offs are ugly.

Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 247wallst.com.

The US government hopes that a large number of nuclear plants will be built in the US over the next 20 years to cut the country's need for oil. But GE (NYSE: GE) CEO Jeffrey Immelt says they will not be built without incentives from the Feds.

According to the FT, "Immelt said only five to 10 US nuclear power projects were likely to go ahead unless there was a carbon-pricing framework to create incentives for utilities to build more." That may be true, but GE should be quiet about championing aid for building those facilities. GE and Hitachi (NYSE: HIT) have a joint venture to build nuclear plants, and the parties would not want to be seen as sell-serving.

The comments raise a difficult issue. The government and utilities both know that the long-term future of cheap oil looks bad. But building nuclear plants take years, is expensive, and requires passing government safety standards. Over the next decade it may actually be cheaper to continue to use fossil fuels even it the price of oil stays high.

GE will make a lot of money on the move to nuclear fuel, but that does not mean that its call for government help is wrong.

Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 247wallst.com.

Going into the IPO for EnergySolutions (NYSE: ES), there appeared to be quite a bit of demand. The shares priced at $23, which was above its $19-$21 range. Although in today's trading, the stock has barely moved.

EnergySolutions is a technology provider for the nuclear services industry. That is, the company helps with things like in-plant support services, operation of nuclear reactors, logistics, and decontamination and decommissioning (D&D).

In fact, the D&D division has perhaps the most promise. Keep in mind that the U.S. government is in the process of shutting down a variety of old power plants. The cost could reach as much as $300 billion. What's more, it looks like the federal government will shell out $50 billion on the initiatives over the next couple years.

Security guards at an Exelon Corp. (NYSE: EXC) nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania were found sleeping on the job, according to media reports. The Chicago-based utility company said it dropped Wackenhut as security contractor for its Peach Bottom plant and is reviewing the security firm's work at other company reactors, according to The Philadelphia Inquirer,

This couldn't have come at a worst time for the nuclear power industry whose reputation has improved over the past few years as a lesser evil to global warming-causing coal-fired power plants. NRG Energy Inc. (NYSE: NRG) is even proposing to build its first nuclear power plant in almost 30 years. But every time the nuclear power industry takes one step forward, it takes two steps back.

In Exelon's case, the embarrassment was captured on video by another security guard over several months and sent to New York television station WCBS-TV, The Inquirer said. The incident, involving fewer than 10 workers, is investigated by the company and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the paper said.

Exelon, of course, was mortified by the video.

"This is not acceptable and we will not tolerate it," said Exelon Generation Chief Operating Officer Chris Crane in a press release. "I want to be clear that nothing has happened at Peach Bottom that represents a security or safety threat to the public. We are dealing with unacceptable behavior, and we will fix it."

What's scary is that it's happened before. Workers were caught napping at the control room of the same nuclear power plant in the late 1980s, according to the New York Times.

Those that don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

I estimate that General Electric Company's (NYSE: GE) Infrastructure segment is worth $154.6 billion.

GE's Infrastructure segment, which constituted 29.0%, 28.3% and 27.8% of GE's consolidated revenues in 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively produces, sells, finances and services equipment for the air transportation and energy generation industries. It also produces, sells and services equipment for the rail transportation and water treatment industries.

GE Infrastructure is really the jewel in the GE crown. Its profits were up 23% in the second quarter. Demand for these products is very high as developing countries with huge cash balances upgrade their infrastructures. While I am not sure how big their budgets are likely to be over the next five to 10 years or whether the price of oil -- needed to fuel those budgets -- will stay as high as it is now, GE Infrastructure looks like a leader in an industry with great profit potential.

Assuming that GE Infrastructure generates net income of $8 billion in 2007, there is one comparable company, United Technologies Corp. (NYSE: UTX) which has a P/E of 19.4. Applying UTX's P/E to GE Infrastructure's earnings forecast yields an estimated value of $154.6 billion.

I would rather have a range of comparable companies, so I welcome suggestions for other publicly traded firms to use as a benchmark.

Next: Breaking Down GE Commercial Finance

Peter Cohan is president of Peter S. Cohan & Associates, a management consulting and venture capital firm. He also teaches management at Babson College and edits The Cohan Letter. He owns General Electric shares and has no financial interest in the other securities mentioned in this post.

In the musical Fiddler on the Roof, Reb Tevye laments in the opening line of "If I Were a Rich Man" that "It's no shame to be poor. But it's no great honor either!"

The image of the poor peasant is so powerful that when people come into even a small windfall, they start to think of Tevye, which is a pity because he's offering bad financial advice. In fact, the last thing that anyone should do if they come into extra money is to break out into song.

Of course, the odds of Tevye or anyone else striking it rich are tiny but many people do get windfalls from an inheritance that's neither as generous nor as wacky as those outlined in this story. More commonly, people get extra money from investments including stocks and real estate.

Though everyone's situation is different, there are a couple of principles that people with extra cash on their hands should consider.

Rule number one is not to act like you've won the lottery. You shouldn't act that way even if you hit the latest Power Ball jackpot. That saying about a fool and his money being soon parted is true. Remember spending yourself into huge amounts of debt is easy. Just ask Michael Jackson.

The best investment for most people is themselves. Pay off any high-interest credit card debt if you have it. Get additional training or education if you need it. If there's still money after those expenses, then consult with either a tax or financial planning professional about your situation. If possible, do this before you get the money so you can plan ahead.

Warren Buffett just invested in a hopefully safer world. Along with CNN founder Ted Turner and former US Senator Sam Nunn, Warren Buffett has pledged $50 million to the International Atomic Energy Agency. Channelled through the Washington, D.C.-based Nuclear Threat Initiative, the money will be used to fund a nuclear fuel bank under the supervision of the IAEA. Countries such as Iran and North Korea will be discouraged from developing their own nuclear programs. Instead, these countries, as well as others, will have access to fuel-grade uranium that will be manufactured and stored according to strict international safety standards. Mr. Buffett is on the advisory board of the Nuclear Threat Initiative. He hopes the $50 million contribution will prod other governments, including the US, to provide an additional $100 million to support an international nuclear development and control program.

In other news related to Mr. Buffett, four additional former executives of Berkshire Hathaway subsidiary General Re were indicted on 20 September 2006 on charges that in 2000 they helped falsify financial data from huge insurance company AIG to make it look like AIG had higher loss reserves that it actually did. This false data was then used to manipulate AIG's stock price. Mr. Buffett testified during the preliminary phase before any indictments were handed down. He was not accused of any wrong doing. Three of the executives, Ronald Ferguson, Elizabeth Monrad, and Robert Graham, face possible sentences of 230 years in prison each as well as fines of up to $46 million apiece if convicted on all counts. A fourth executive, Christopher Garand, faces up to 160years in prison and fines totaling up to $29.5 million if convicted on all counts. The Department of Justice is being assisted in its prosecution by two other former General Re executives, John Houldsworth and Richard Napier, each of whom have already pled guilty to falsifying SEC documents. They are awaiting sentencing.

General Re was also in the news today for calling a shareholder meeting of its German subsidiary, Cologne Re. General Re already owns 95.2% of Cologne Re and wants to force recalcitrant shareholders to sell the remaining shares. The brief statement gives no explanation for the timing of the request for action nor a price for the remaining shares.