From the ‘Dark Side,’ Build More Nukes
April 4, 2007 on 11:07 pm | In Global Warming, National |
A bill is pending before the California legislature that would lift a longstanding moratorium on new nuclear power plants.
The reality of climate change has prompted even longtime greenies to reconsider their opposition to nukes. It’s a clean and incredibly muscular form of power that has a remarkable safety record. We have more than 60 such plants in this country and about the same number exist in France and Japan.
How many significant accidents have there been in the history of nuclear power? I can only think of two. Know of any others? What will it take to convince the nuke-phobes that this is a safe and non-polluting industry?
Get a load of someone named Dan Hearst, president of the Committee to Bridge the Gap, a California-based anti-nuclear watchdog group, who, according to the Chronicle, said using the environment as an argument for nuclear power is simply “shameful.”
These are people who have been on the dark side on everything and are now callously trying to drown us in radioactive waste.
You’re right, Dan. The waste is a downside, but it’s the only one I can see. Besides, they say modern nukes produce only about 20% of the waste older reactors like Three Mile Island do. Try drowning in that.
I have one question for Al Gore: If I move to California and get my electricity from a spanking new nuke plant, am I purchasing one of those carbon offsets that allows me to live in a house like yours guilt-free? If so, count me in for a walk on the dark side.
P.S. Wonder if Dan is related to the famous energy consuming family that owns The Chronicle.
3 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
Powered by WordPress with Pool theme design by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.
Valid XHTML and CSS. ^Top^
Lets go retro…
how about building coal fired plants!!!
Just a joke there kiddies!!
Comment by Marshall Miles — April 5, 2007 #
Hey Terry, Very simplistic here. How many accidents have we had from coal and gas fired plants? Yet we live with the nasty day-to-day emmissions and other side effects of that energy source too. Also, none of the “New” plants have been built so predictions of less waste should be taken with a grain of salt. So far most other predictions and promises by champions of nuclear power have not been fullfilled. I am no expert on this so I try to read and understand as much as I can to form an opinion. For years I’ve been getting the newsletter, “Science for Democratic Action” from IEER, Institute for Energy and Environmental Research. These guys are experts and do work for the DOE, the NRC, and others. You can go to their website and read or download their report from August of 2006. It’s an interesting scientific analysis of nuclear power as a solution for greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. I heard some fairly convincing stuff recently about the promise of nukes in this area but when I checked out the source I ended up at what Diane Farsetta of the Center for Media and Democracy calls a “Nuclear Front Group”. I always check sources to see what’s in it for them. If it’s money, I am dubious.
Comment by Al Ginouves — April 10, 2007 #
Al,
You make some good points and I will look at your sources. The Center for Media and Democracy is left leaning, so I would be as skeptical of their pronouncements as I would of any right-wing think tank.
My understanding is new plants have been built in Europe and Asia and that’s where we learned they produce less waste. And hey, the profit motive is not always bad. Sometimes it’s just what the doctor ordered.
Still, nuke plants require a huge investment up front, so the return is slow and long term. Not only do they have to build a new plant, but also very costly distribution systems (that often entail lengthy litigation) must be constructed. I’m not sure how attractive that is to investors looking for a quick profit.
Do you have a better idea for a muscular energy source that will sustain this economy without carbon emissions? I can’t find one that will deliver power on the scale that we need.
Comment by Terry — April 10, 2007 #