After hearing John Edwards declare his outright opposition to nuclear energy during Tuesday's Democratic debate in Nevada, Adam Blinick of The New Republic wrote ...
UPDATE: Matt Zeitlin has some thoughts on Edwards and his anti-nuclear stance.
Gwyneth Cravens's illuminating Power to Save the World: The Truth about Nuclear Energy dispels many of the myths about nuclear energy that Edwards' position helps prop up. For example, she notes coal plants emit more radiation than nuclear ones. (In fact, humans get more radiation from medical x-rays or flying round-trip from New York to L.A. than living near a nuclear plant). Also, Cravens argues that nuclear energy plants are almost completely risk-free regarding nuclear weapons proliferation (it's a different enrichment process) and potential terrorist attacks (U.S. plants are simply too secure). She also makes the argument that we likely have safe ways of disposing of nuclear waste, even at Yucca Mountain.Hmmm. Where have we heard that before? For more on the Cravens book, click here for a look at our archives.
For all the empty "unity" rhetoric that inevitably is present during an election cycle, nuclear energy--if looked at with sober eyes--provides a real opportunity for the left and right to get together and tackle three of today's greatest challenges: national security, energy independence, and climate change.
UPDATE: Matt Zeitlin has some thoughts on Edwards and his anti-nuclear stance.
Comments
Nuclear plant build in America and elsewhere will mean the creation of many very high paying and importantly stable union jobs, from running the plants, maintaining, constructing by skilled tradesmen.. And then the high paying jobs at the American factories to make all of the parts. These aren't 9 dollar an hour service jobs.