We Are Not Ready (for expansion of nuclear energy) - Bob Herbert

[groovedaddy]

We were told by oil industry executives and their acolytes and enablers in government that deep-water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico would not cause the kind of catastrophe that we’ve been watching with an acute and painful sense of helplessness for the past three months. Advances in technology, they said, would ward off the worst-case scenarios. Fail-safe systems like the blowout preventer a mile below the surface at the Deepwater Horizon rig site would keep wildlife and the environment safe.

Americans are not particularly good at learning even the most painful lessons. Denial is our default mode. But at the very least this tragedy in the gulf should push us to look much harder at the systems we need to prevent a catastrophic accident at a nuclear power plant, and for responding to such an event if it occurred.

Right now, we’re not ready.

Nuclear plants are the new hot energy item. The Obama administration is offering federal loan guarantees to encourage the construction of a handful of new plants in the U.S., the first in decades. Not to be outdone, Senator Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, a certifiable nuke zealot, would like to see 100 new plants built over the next 20 years.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/20/opinion/20herbert.html?th&emc=th

[Tikki]

1. True statement there, that Mr. Herbert...We Are Not Ready For More Nuclear...

Until we clean up the sh*t left behind...we shouldn't add more to the heap.

Tikki

[hedgehog]

2. I agree, but will also post an argument presented to me:

"Even if there are several accidents, wouldn't nuclear power be better than cooking the entire planet by accumulating carbon dioxide in the atmosphere?"

All of which means we really have to get moving on renewables!

[Tikki]

3. Yes we do....but, please don't think of Nuke as renewable...

Nuke waste has to be solved. Some will tell you that waste is/will be recyclable..
That is not being used as of now and there are piles of waste all over that still glow.


Tikki

[hedgehog]

4. Oh, I agree with you on that one. When serious people make

serious proposals about setting up an "atomic priesthood" to keep our descendants away from contaminated areas, I'd have to say there is a serious problem with nuclear waste.

I just posted what I did to explain why some people might back nuclear power. What I consider "renewables" are wind, solar, biomass, geothermal, etc.