The WaPost editorial page raises the issue of nuclear waste and the role that its disposal plays in frustrating a further build-out of nuclear power in our country. My praise is limited however, in that the editorial staff simply cannot bring itself to question the President and Senator Reid on exactly why it is the taxpayers have sunk billions of dollars into Yucca Mountain--money Reid and the rapacious Nevada Congressional delegation have been happy to accept--without so much as an an ounce of waste material being stored there and no prospect for its future storage. Instead, the President impanels yet another "blue ribbon" commission to study the issue and gives it two years to decide.
This is hogwash. It is time to complete Yucca Mountain and begin shipping the nation's nuclear waste from its temporary, on-site storage locations to a location tailor-made--with billions of dollars of gold plating to boot--for its storage.
Showing posts with label nuclear power. Show all posts
Showing posts with label nuclear power. Show all posts
Monday, June 14, 2010
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
WaPost Reports on Growth In Nuclear Power's Popularity
Here's an interesting story about one of my favorite topics, nuclear power. The US--land of cheap coal and natural gas--has fallen way behind in our nuclear infrastructure. The spectacular startup costs are at least partially to blame, with a significant portion of that cost coming from the protests and lawsuits that are sure to attend new construction.
Hopefully that tide is turning. There are presently 22 reactors before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and many in the Obama Administration are seeking to stoke additional interest with federal loan guarantees--something of which I am very much in favor.
And from the Rahm Emmanuel school of never waste the opportunity created by a crisis--I'll turn a deaf ear to the anguished cries of the global warming crowd, as it is their frenzied kvetching that is causing the environmental movement to become less opposed to new nuclear--citing its abiding carbon neutrality.
We should move forward with nuclear energy for one reason and one reason only--diversifying our energy supply. We cannot ever hope to mitigate the control exercised over us by oil producing nations if we do not move to some kind of alternate energy for the movement of vehicles on our roads. To me, electricity is the natural path. To respond to an exploding demand for electricity (in a carbon neutral way, dearies), we must invest in nuclear power.
Hopefully that tide is turning. There are presently 22 reactors before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and many in the Obama Administration are seeking to stoke additional interest with federal loan guarantees--something of which I am very much in favor.
And from the Rahm Emmanuel school of never waste the opportunity created by a crisis--I'll turn a deaf ear to the anguished cries of the global warming crowd, as it is their frenzied kvetching that is causing the environmental movement to become less opposed to new nuclear--citing its abiding carbon neutrality.
We should move forward with nuclear energy for one reason and one reason only--diversifying our energy supply. We cannot ever hope to mitigate the control exercised over us by oil producing nations if we do not move to some kind of alternate energy for the movement of vehicles on our roads. To me, electricity is the natural path. To respond to an exploding demand for electricity (in a carbon neutral way, dearies), we must invest in nuclear power.
Labels:
energy,
global warming,
nuclear power
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)