Skip to main content

The Candidates in Their Own Words

In the interest of fairness, we looked for a few actual quotes from the remaining Presidential candidates on nuclear energy. All of these quotes have appeared on NEI Nuclear Notes before, but it might be useful to gather them together.

First, Hilary Clinton at a campaign stop in South Carolina in October of last year (a little cleaned up from the transcript):

I think nuclear power has to be part of our energy solution. I think we've got to do a better job at figuring out how we're going to deal with the waste. You know, because in a post 9/11 world we've got to be very careful about the waste and about how we run our nuclear plants.

I don't have any preconceived opposition. I want to be sure that we do it right, as carefully as we can, because obviously it's a tremendous source of energy. We get about twenty percent of our energy from nuclear power in our country. A lot of people don't realize that. And other countries, like France, get much much more.

So we do have to look at it because it doesn't put greenhouse gas emissions into the air. But we have to make sure it's done as safely as possible.

Second, Barack Obama from the Democratic primary debate at Dartmouth College last September:

I don't think that we can take nuclear power off the table. What we have to make sure of is that we have the capacity to store waste properly and safely, and that we reduce whatever threats might come from terrorism. And if we can do that in a technologically sound way, then we should pursue it. If we can't, we should not. But there is no magic bullet on energy. We're going to have to look at all the various options.

Third, John McCain, in an Interview with The Detroit News’ editorial board in January of this year:

I believe we can and are developing technologies that can have a dramatic effect on greenhouse gas emissions. I believe we have to go back to nuclear power. Why can’t we look at what the French have done? About 80 percent of their electricity is generated by nuclear power. And they are the closest to meeting the Kyoto goals that they set for themselves.

Odd to see candidates on both sides of the partisan divide bowing to the French - aren't they wrong about everything? - but otherwise, all three candidates are saying publicly that nuclear energy cannot be ignored. Candidates frequently finesse their statements based on their audiences, as we saw when the Democrats clamored over each other to be the first to torpedo Yucca Mountain at the Nevada debate, but these are clear, public statements of support.

Ironically, it is Al Gore, surely no friend of nuclear energy, who has cornered Democrats into acknowledging that America cannot address climate change without nuclear. Further, despite a continuing debate in popular culture, no one in government goes very far out of their way to dispute climate change or the role of nuclear in mitigating carbon emission.

Nuclear energy has walked through the door that Al Gore kicked down, and no Democrat seems to have a way to get that door back on its hinges. In many cases, they even like the breeze that comes through.

Comments

Anonymous said…
And both Hillary and Obama have issued statement against nuclear power, too. But McCain hasn't. Now consider this about Hillary Clinton:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20080403/cm_usatoday/clintonfoundationdonorsremainshroudedinsecrecy;_ylt=At.nN09ongkYwie.KK_dsy2s0NUE

"The Saudi royal family gave $10 million, according to The Washington Post, and numerous foreign governments have given $1 million. The largest contributors appear to include Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim Helü, Canadian mining entrepreneur Frank Giustra and the Lundin Group, a Canadian oil and gas company. Each has publicly pledged $100 million for development projects."

If your campaign is being supported by people who are rich in oil and especially natural gas, then what incentive do you have to support the one thing that can compete against these sources of energy?

Mark my words (again): an Obama or Hillary Presidency will result in the appointment of an anti-nuke as DOE secretary, and more NRC Commissioners like Jackzo (Democrat Harry Reid's hand-picked, anti-Yucca Mtn selection).

If you want a nuclear power resurgence, then you must vote AGAINST the Democrats. It's that simple.

Popular posts from this blog

A Design Team Pictures the Future of Nuclear Energy

For more than 100 years, the shape and location of human settlements has been defined in large part by energy and water. Cities grew up near natural resources like hydropower, and near water for agricultural, industrial and household use.

So what would the world look like with a new generation of small nuclear reactors that could provide abundant, clean energy for electricity, water pumping and desalination and industrial processes?

Hard to say with precision, but Third Way, the non-partisan think tank, asked the design team at the Washington, D.C. office of Gensler & Associates, an architecture and interior design firm that specializes in sustainable projects like a complex that houses the NFL’s Dallas Cowboys. The talented designers saw a blooming desert and a cozy arctic village, an old urban mill re-purposed as an energy producer, a data center that integrates solar panels on its sprawling flat roofs, a naval base and a humming transit hub.

In the converted mill, high temperat…

Seeing the Light on Nuclear Energy

If you think that there is plenty of electricity, that the air is clean enough and that nuclear power is a just one among many options for meeting human needs, then you are probably over-focused on the United States or Western Europe. Even then, you’d be wrong.

That’s the idea at the heart of a new book, “Seeing the Light: The Case for Nuclear Power in the 21st Century,” by Scott L. Montgomery, a geoscientist and energy expert, and Thomas Graham Jr., a retired ambassador and arms control expert.


Billions of people live in energy poverty, they write, and even those who don’t, those who live in places where there is always an electric outlet or a light switch handy, we need to unmake the last 200 years of energy history, and move to non-carbon sources. Energy is integral to our lives but the authors cite a World Health Organization estimate that more than 6.5 million people die each year from air pollution.  In addition, they say, the global climate is heading for ruinous instability. E…

Sneak Peek

There's an invisible force powering and propelling our way of life.
It's all around us. You can't feel it. Smell it. Or taste it.
But it's there all the same. And if you look close enough, you can see all the amazing and wondrous things it does.
It not only powers our cities and towns.
And all the high-tech things we love.
It gives us the power to invent.
To explore.
To discover.
To create advanced technologies.
This invisible force creates jobs out of thin air.
It adds billions to our economy.
It's on even when we're not.
And stays on no matter what Mother Nature throws at it.
This invisible force takes us to the outer reaches of outer space.
And to the very depths of our oceans.
It brings us together. And it makes us better.
And most importantly, it has the power to do all this in our lifetime while barely leaving a trace.
Some people might say it's kind of unbelievable.
They wonder, what is this new power that does all these extraordinary things?