After reading the recent piece in Scientific American by John Deutch and Ernest Moniz proposing a tripling of the nation's nuclear capacity by 2050, Eric Berger of the Houston Chronicle is wondering out loud if it might not be time for a compromise of some sort:
This is where policy and science become really interesting. Bush supports nuclear energy, but has been loathe to act on global warming. Alternatively, environmentalists and some scientists have long been wary of nuclear energy, but with global warming have recently begun advocating its use despite their concerns (spent fuel disposal, proliferation.)The Scientific American piece is now available online.
This potential solution to curbing greenhouse gases and limiting exposure to rising oil prices -- building lots of nuclear plants, ensuring their safe operation and taxing "dirty" power producers -- requires compromises from both sides. Isn't that what compromise is all about?
Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Power, Energy, Technology, Electricity, Environment