There was an interesting letter to the editor on July 15, 2006 in the Concord Monitor Online titled The wrong fix, TYSON SLOCUM, Washington, D.C. – Letter. It is a response to a previous letter that talked about the need for a diverse set of solutions, including nuclear power, to both global climate change and dependence on imported oil.
The author, Tyson Slocum, makes the following statement:
Moreover, nuclear power brings the significant risks of pollution from uranium mining, highly radioactive waste and the risks of accidents, terrorism and weapons proliferation. Slow and expensive to build, new nuclear reactors will dominate societal resources rather than diversify our options and will prove an ineffective solution to climate change.
The European Renewable Energy Council, the International Energy Agency and even Shell Oil have all conducted studies demonstrating the feasibility of moving to renewable technologies such as wind, solar, geothermal and wave/tidal power. These sources can more quickly reduce CO2 emissions and meet U.S. energy needs in the coming decades without the cost, risk and burden of nuclear power.
Let me translate – if nuclear power is allowed to remain on the list of acceptable solutions, it will “dominate” its competition because decision makers will give it all of the available resources. Therefore, we need to listen to the renewable energy lobby, the fossil fuel lobby, and even the Shell Oil company which have all produced “studies” that demonstrate the feasibility of keeping nuclear power out of the game.
The paper identifies Mr. Slocum as the director of energy programs for Public Citizen. In case you are not familiar with that organization, it is one of Ralph Nader’s groups and it has been actively opposing nuclear power developments for about 30 years.
Some things just make you say – hmmm.