Not too long ago, we reviewed a report that looked at nuclear energy (and other energy sources) as biodiversity agents. This had to do, in part, with the amount of land a facility needs to function. Nuclear energy and fossil fuel plants use relatively little, wind farms and solar arrays quite a lot of land . Based on an objective and transparent analysis of our sustainable energy choices, we have come to the evidence-based conclusion that nuclear energy is a good option for biodiversity conservation (and society in general) and that other alternatives to fossil fuels should be subjected to the same cost–benefit analyses (in terms of biodiversity and climate outcomes, as well as sociopolitical imperatives) before accepting or dismissing them. Writer Barry Brook, who collected 75 scientists to endorse his paper, is interested in land use as it impacts flora and fauna. Biodiversity concerns do not get as much play as they might – and, when they do, it annoys many when land is withdraw...
In advance of Senator John McCain's tour of the Fermi 2 nuclear plant this afternoon, the Obama campaign's press office has just released this statement
Comments
But not Yuca mountain, lets build somethying new. Why? Nothing specific, just doesn't seem safe.
How long did it take to build Yuca mountain? Started more than a decade ago. How long will it take to build somewhere else?
Sounds to me like: "I support noise makers at birthday parties as long as nobody makes any noise."
Phony.
McCain said there was “no way that you could ever seriously attack the issue of greenhouse gas emissions without nuclear power, and anybody who tells you differently is not telling the truth.”
Which of these men is speaking definitively and without fear of the polls?
Neither. Bisconti Research and NEI tell us most Americans want new nuclear plants, right? So he's in line with the polls.
McCain as maverick is one of the biggest myths in Washington.
Sure. Obama is a lawyer, and his "belief" about Yucca Mountain clearly does not come from his own personal expertise.
So Obama is apparently willing to cut off the independent scientific review of Yucca Mountain by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, probably because he "believes" that the NRC's likely positive conclusion on Yucca Mountain would not correspond with his negative "belief" about the Yucca Mountain's safety.
So an Obama administration will use the best science to inform its nuclear energy policy decisions. Sure.
where has he said this? source?
"Obama is a lawyer, and his "belief" about Yucca Mountain clearly does not come from his own personal expertise."
what's McCain's technical background in nuclear power?
Anyone here believe that a relatively inexperienced politician lawyer will do what is right instead of what furthers their political career?
McCain has at least had much more life experiences in the military (big user of nuclear power) and the Senate (boss of the NRC) with respect to nuclear power and politics than Obama. Wisdom comes with age and exposure only.