Hold on here, because I am about to unleash my fury. If you have ever read my politico ponderings you will know I can sometimes get fired up. I actually held it in most of the Convention. But here it goes.
JOHN MCCAIN PROPOSES 45 NEW NUCLEAR PLANTS BY 2030! BAD IDEA! His ultimate goal is 100!
It is time to take a stand on this issue on some level. What is wrong with nuclear power? Why hasn’t a new nuclear plant been built in this country since the 1970’s? Well, there are plenty of reasons and John McCain’s assertion that if Europe is doing it, we should too, is completely uni-visionary and lacking innovation. We have the potential to develop truly renewable sources of energy and avoid the many hazards nuclear power poses for the overall security of our country.
1) Nuclear power requires uranium mining. Uranium is a finite resource. Over 70% of this country’s current uranium demand is met by foreign sources. Russia is the largest supplier. Nuclear power does not leave us less dependent on “foreign” sources of energy. Uranium mining is environmentally devastating and poses serious health risks to nearby communities. Navajo reservations in the Southwest have been left with thyroid cancer and leukemia as the legacy of uranium mining.
2) Nuclear reactors require water to cool their core temperatures. This requires, well, WATER AND LOTS OF IT! This water cannot be pumped back into the original source, and a significant amount of water volume is lost due to evaporation. Plants in the Southeast and France have had to go completely off-line due to lack of water as a result of drought. It is potentially dangerous to shut-down a nuclear plant, and it is not considered a normal and safe protocol. We in the West know how precious water is.
3) There is no good solution to the waste issue. FRANCE DUMPS RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL INTO THE ENGLISH CHANNEL THROUGH EFFLUENT PIPES. Yikes! No good solution, and 100 new plants means way more waste with no where to go. The “de-commissioning” plants that convert radioactive waste into “disposable” waste are decades from being built. And do not tell me that we should just get rid of regulations and build them faster. It is exactly that kind of thinking which will result in a nuclear disaster. Which brings me to…
4) We are a very large nation, with a very complex bureaucracy. In our current global political environment does it make sense, given the transparency of our current administration, to allow a massive expansion in the nuclear industrial complex?
5)RENEWABLES ARE THE FUTURE! Congress has repeatedly not extended the tax credits for renewable energy. The nuclear industry has far greater incentives than the renewable industry. Nuclear purports to be the whole pie energy source, but for all the reasons above, it cannot be a reasonable solution. We should focus on the development of a diverse energy portfolio with renewable sources as the priority.
It is time to take a position on this as a Party. Obama will have to say something, other than that he supports nuclear power, and soon. I believe Obama will democratize power in this nation in such a way that he will ask the people what power they want and when he hears a resounding call for an emphasis on renewable power like wind and solar (both of which will soon be available as baseload power) he will not unreasonably expand the threats of a nuclear energy source with too many problems to be considered reasonable.
100 New Nuclear Plants? 100 More Years In Iraq? John McCain Has Got His Numbers Wrong!
In summation, nuclear power has a hidden carbon footprint through the mining and transport process. There is no way it is renewable given the finite supply of uranium, and its health risks are in no way to our benefit. We should step up for renewable energy and encourage Barack Obama to emphasize a responsible vision for our energy future that does not include provisions for an army of nuke plants, but rather a peaceful plan for a country powered by the wind and the sun. Now that is innovation.
Amen Liz! Well said and thanks for saying it. Does SRA have an in with any national Obama staff? Mark’s been invited to propose some policy platform initiatives from the recreation community and there’s one on climate change he’s working on.
-c
No “in” at the moment, although I can check to see if a few of the delegates traveling to Denver have any direct paths. (If any are reading this, let me know). For Mark’s comments, emphasizing the hidden carbon-footprint and no resolution to the waste issue is critical. It makes little sense for Obama at this point to take the same position as McCain, and hopefully he will try for a contrast be talking-up renewables.