If there's one media outlet that's gotten the story right over the online battle over nuclear energy and loan guarantees, it's Salon and reporter Katharine Mieszkowski. Go there right now to read, Nuclear War on YouTube. And be sure to watch the companion video that cuts all of the videos together in such a way that none of the anti-nuke charges goes unanswered.
I hope the folks at our member companies are taking notice of this. If our industry is going to fight and win online the fight over this music video ought to serve as a blueprint for how we go forward.
UPDATE: More from Rod Adams.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Salon Features YouTube and Nuclear Energy
Posted by Eric McErlain at 9:58 AM
Labels: Ben Harper, Bonnie Raitt, electricity, Elizabeth King, energy, environment, Graham Nash, Harvey Wasserman, Jackson Browne, No Nukes, Nuclear, NukeFree.org, technology
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
What other choices but Nuclear Energy do we have? Well at the present time Fossil Fuels are polluting the environment. Solar and wind Power are a joke. I've been a reactor operator for over 30 and I can tell you there isn’t a safer industry in the country. How many people have died at chemical plants compared to Nuclear Power plants? I would be worried about the train running next to your house carrying a load of chlorine are acetone before I would worry about a nuclear power plant. We need more liable nuclear power plants in this country. We need to be self-reliant when it comes to electricity production in this country. There are new nuclear power plants being built all over the world. WANO (World Association of Nuclear Operators) is the watchdog for this industry. Let them do their job. Check out their web site http://www.wano.org.uk/index.asp.
Right now I am sitting about 30 feet from the core of an operating reactor. I have been on the job for over 20 years. About a half-mile away is an at-grade rail crossing. Now, in the time I have been here, which of the two, reactor or railroad, do you think has had more accidents (including the need for evacuation)? Give you a hint: it isn't the reactor.
The Salon link only gives part of the article and the Next Link on that page does nothing.
I felt compelled to make a reply to that video on Youtube. Their position is pretty weak.
Wow this is ridiculous. I love how they can't seem to separate this uber-pacifism from anti-nuclear agendas. Apparently there is some sort of belief that nuclear energy is somehow the same as all-out war with nuclear weapons. I saw some idiot asking "How would the victims of Hiroshima feel..."
My question: "Considering how many more died in the Tokyo firebombing raids, how can you condone combustion? Combustion is obviously evil because it can be used in weaponry."
Also... Due to all the people who've been severely beaten, I find mechanical energy to be absolutely repulsive and inexcusable!
I think we do have other choices - greater fuel efficiency and more renewable energy. The loan guarantees in the nuclear provision is essentially giving the nuclear industry a virtual blank check from taxpayers. Nuclear waste is an environmental hazard we are going to have to face for centuries to come. It would wipe out any environmental gains achieved by a 35 mpg Corporate Average Fuel Economy standard and 15% Renewable Electricity Standard with toxic nuclear waste.
If you support a fuel efficiency and renewable energy in our new 2007 energy bill, sign this petition:
Energy Bill 2007
If you oppose more nuclear power sign this petition:
Nuke Free Energy Bill 2007
"Nuke-free" energy is just what we don't want. Conservation doesn't result in a single watt of additional capacity. So-called "renewables" can't carry the load, as they found out in California and are coming to realize in Sweden and Germany. Nuclear produces very little "waste" compared with the amount of emissions-free energy it produces, and what waste is produced is in immobile, readily-managable form (compare that with CO2 and SO4 produced from combustion of carbon fuels, which is what you'll have more of if you go "nuke free"). If you're really, truly concerned about the environment and climate change, the last thing you want is "nuke-free".
Post a Comment