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.

The United States is a nation whose electric power generation system and grid is becoming increasing inadequate, even as the nation grapples with another energy problem -- the $4 per gallon gasoline era.

Moreover, an economic slowdown and a relatively mild summer have to-date reduced the typical electric load electric power generation plants would face, but that respite will end when the U.S. economy starts to expand at a healthy rate again. And when it does, electric power demand will increase.

What's one model the United States could follow to generate more electricity while the same time reducing coal-based pollution and climate change? France.

That's right: France. Nuclear power is experiencing a mild comeback in the United States, with 34 new reactor applications on file at the U.S.'s Nuclear Regulatory Agency. In France, it never left. Further, had the United States followed the French model, the U.S. would be vastly more energy self-sufficient today.

France: liberty, fraternity, equality, fission

Nuclear power never went out of style in France, and for this reason France is decades ahead of the United States -- and much of the world, for that matter -- regarding energy self-sufficiency, The New York Times reported. An astounding 77% of France's electricity comes from its 58 nuclear power plants, and it is a net-exporter of electricity to Europe. The United States has 104 nuclear power plants, which account for only 19.4% of its generated electricity, according to U.S. Department of Energy data, The Times reported.

That the developing and developed world will need considerably more electricity in the decades ahead would not surprise most investors / readers.

That both economic zones can achieve this goal while adding a minimal amount of soot to the atmosphere, however, would.

And the technology that will undoubtedly serve as a key energy-generation component in emerging markets' 21st century power grid? You guessed it: nuclear power -- the power generation form that has lagged in the United States for more than 20 years, due to environmental regulations.

China, India push forward with plant plans

China and India are two emerging market nations that recognize that nuclear power is an essential part of meeting future electricity demand. Nuclear power will account for more than 5% of China's power output by 2020, Bloomberg News reported Monday. Meanwhile, India will start three nuclear reactors this year.

Economist Glen Langan said that while nuclear power is not, strictly speaking, a renewable energy, it has to be considered as part of the next-generation energy mix [along with wind and solar power] to meet the U.S.'s growing demand for electricity.

In light of oil's rise to triple-digit prices, the United States' inability to pass an energy policy aimed at increased efficiency, renewable energy, and energy independence, represents an opportunity squandered -- on two fronts: transportation and power generation.

True, oil has retreated from the $135 range to the $125-128 range, but the nation now faces record-high gasoline/diesel prices, along with high prices for heating oil, natural gas, and coal. As a result, the broad-based disposable income -- so essential for U.S. economic growth -- has been squeezed, with many economists now arguing adequate GDP growth is not possible, if energy prices remain at current levels.

At minimum, the U.S. faces a period of economic and social adjustment -- corporate, public, personal -- as it copes with the brave new world of $4 gasoline ... and that's if gasoline remains in the $4 per gallon range. A variety of scenarios could quickly send gasoline over $5 per gallon and higher in 2009.

Almost on cue, following oil's $12 rise in two days to $134, the International Energy Agency said the world needs to invest an additional $45 trillion in the decades ahead to vastly expand both nuclear power and wind power capacity to meet global energy needs.

Strictly speaking, the IEA's call to action was rooted in reducing the world's greenhouse gas emissions and achieving what it argues will be "a clean, clever, energy future" and not to move away from oil or fossil fuels solely on cost grounds. (pdf)

Still, the report's 2050 ETP Baseline scenario projects that CO2 emissions will rise by 130% and oil demand will rise by 70% - - the latter total being equal to five times Saudi Arabia's current oil production. If the IEA's oil projection is correct, that would suggest additional large increases in the price of oil in the decades ahead - - on top of oil's more than 400% price rise since 2001.

Clean coal has hit speed bump on the path to the nation's cleaner energy future.

The United States Government has canceled support for a clean coal demonstration project after the project's development costs nearly doubled, to $1.8 billion, citing the need to limit taxpayer exposure, according to a New York Times report.

Further, more than a decade into the research process, it remains an unanswered question whether the clean coal technology -- capturing and injecting carbon dioxide back into the ground -- can be executed in a safe and cost-effective manner.

Among other hurdles, scientists need to determine which soil formations are most environmentally appropriate for holding and organically processing the carbon dioxide, and that don't contain the risk of dioxide bubbling back to the surface, or polluting ground water.

"Market Vectors Global Nuclear (ASE: NLR) offers investors a well-diversified play on the booming nuclear power industry," notes Paul Tracy.

The editor of The ETF Investor -- a top notch service that offers in-depth analysis of exchange-traded funds -- turns its analysis towards the outlook for the nuclear power sector.

"The ETF is designed to track the performance of companies that derive at least half their total revenues from the nuclear power business. That list includes firms that build nuclear power plants, mine uranium, and generate electricity in nuclear plants.

"Demand for electricity is surging globally, with most of that growth coming from fast-growing emerging markets like China and India. In fact, according to the Department of Energy, Chinese and Indian power demand is expected to nearly triple between now and 2030.

"These nations (and many others) are choosing to expand their nuclear power plant capacity to meet some of that demand. China has been aggressively opening new plants in recent years and has plans to open dozens more in an effort to triple nuclear's share of Chinese electricity supply by 2030.

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.

"Oil is setting the stage for a big rally in alternative energy," says Eric Roseman, resources expert and editor of Commodity Trend Alert. Here's a look at two stocks poised to benefit from this trend.

"A surging oil price is extremely bullish for alternative energy. Over the last 12 months, as oil prices have doubled, uranium and solar energy stocks have crashed.

"These sectors have declined because sub-prime has taken everything to the basement until recently - not because solar energy or uranium are flawed investment themes.

"That's why we've recently placed new trades on Suntech Power Holdings (NYSE: STP) and Cameco (NYSE: CCJ). There's no way high oil prices won't encourage more interest in these distressed sectors.

When oil was at $65 a barrel, almost no one believed it would double. There were a few nuts making the case, but they were ignored like Galileo was when he said the Earth moved around the sun.

Now, it is hard to find analysts who do not believe oil is going to move over $140 a barrel, and, perhaps above $200. Their reasoning is sound enough. Demand in emerging nations like China and India is still increasing. While crude use in the U.S. may be off slightly, it's not off enough to matter. Supplies may be drying up as fields in the Middle East, Mexico, and Russia age. A political catastrophe in Nigeria or Venezuela could cut production.

Against all that, a case for a sharp drop in oil prices is quietly forming and its logic is powerful but poorly understood.

The first argument that oil is too high is that it has been pushed up in part by speculators rushing to cover bets that crude will fall. It is a bit like a "short squeeze" in stocks. Once the "covering" is done, oil prices will face less pressure on the upside.

The rise in commodity prices is set to complicate the growth plans for yet another sector.

Projected costs for a new generation of nuclear power plants on the drawing boards are increasing at an enormous rate -- in some cases double to quadruple their earlier, rough estimates - - The Wall Street Journal reported Monday(subscription required).

Further, that new generation of nuclear power plants has emerged as an important component of the United States' future energy supply, due to $100-plus oil and the technology's superiority to high-pollution, coal-fired energy plants, The Journal reported Monday. However, surging costs for cement, steel, and copper, among other factors, have caused nuclear plant construction costs to soar to $5-$12 billion -- a trend that could lead to delayed or canceled projects.

Rising energy costs

Economist Peter Dawson told BloggingStocks Monday what investors should take away from the rising nuclear plant cost phenomenon is not so much a comparison of the positives/negatives of each energy technology, but the rising cost of energy, across all platforms, in general.

"Despite the recent economic slowdown, Hexcel (NYSE: HXL) is seeing its market for carbon-fiber-based aerospace products and parts boom," says energy sector expert Elliott Gue.

The contributing editor to Personal Finance explains, "And in addition to growing aerospace demand, the firm has growing markets in wind power and nuclear power." Here is his review.

"Hexcel makes lightweight carbon-fiber parts used on modern aircraft designs. New aircraft designs such as the 787 incorporate far higher carbon-fiber content than older planes, so Hexcel is becoming an increasingly important supplier.

"The aerospace demand cycle isn't directly tied to demand for air travel. Airlines and aircraft leasing firms typically plan their purchases of new planes many years in advance; the aerospace cycle is highly visible and longer-term in nature.

"Currently, demand for modern fuel-efficient aircraft such as the 787 Dreamliner from Boeing (NYSE: BA) is booming. Hexcel recently reported fourth quarter results and offered management's outlook for the year ahead. Just over 50% of the company's total sales come from the commercial aerospace market.

"The market is booming: Sales surged more than 21% compared to the fourth quarter of 2006 in constant dollar terms. Hexcel sells to both Airbus and Boeing which have a combined acklog of nearly 7,000 planes that have been ordered but not yet delivered.