An Energy Policy

Whoever is the next president will need an energy policy. Both McCain and Obama are opposed to drilling in Alaska, which is so nearsighted, but McCain is farsighted enough to realize the future demands cheap energy and is proposing we build 45 nuclear reactors by 2030. It's a start:

"Every year, these reactors alone spare the atmosphere from the equivalent of nearly all auto emissions in America. Yet for all these benefits, we have not broken ground on a single nuclear plant in over thirty years," he said. "And our manufacturing base to even construct these plants is almost gone." [Read]

Our politicians refused to look to the future for oil and we have to ask if we are going to let them do the same with nuclear. You will pay the price for their inaction long before they have to suffer the consequences.

posted at 19:10:38 on 06/18/08 by clearpolitics - Category: Economics - [Permalink]

Previous | Next


R & J Weigle wrote:

Clear Politics is not thinking clearly about energy sources. Nuclear power may be cheap but will have many long term consequences for current and future generations. Where do you store all of the nuclear wastes from all of the nuclear power plants? Also, the impact upon local population groups when accidental releases of radioactive elements are released into the surrounding air, soil and water. We live within fifty miles of a nuclear reactor and only learn about accidents in our local news quietly contained in the back pages of our local newspapers after the fact and then not mentioned in the local television newscasts. This news is very quietly released with no further followup.
I recently had a conversation with the wife of a nuclear engineer who works with our local plant. He is currently being treated at Mayo Clinic for a 'white blood cell disease' that will possibly be fatal. She mentioned a recent accident at our local plant where her husband participated in correcting the problem. The local hospitals do not track cases of cancer or cancer like diseases in this area. Why? We only know that cancer is common here and can be attributed to many sources in our rural farm area.
There are safer energy resources that could be quickly obtainable with government research and support. Why isn't and hasn't this been accomplished? We've been aware of the need for many years. Corporations with very large money accounts are making these decisions for the US population with their continuing access to power and dollars their ONLY concern.
Clear politics is definitely not thinking clearly about the long life of the nation or its people.
06/20/08 12:10:56

clearpolitics wrote:

Nuclear energy is not only cheap but clean and safe. Take a look at Japan, France and other countries that have had to take responsibility for their energy needs. France receives the preponderance of their electrical energy from nuclear power, but you probably think they are third world and the absurdly inefficient and ugly wind farms are the future.

Accidental releases? That is a fear borne of ignorance. Look at the "experience" of other countries and consider the advancements in nuclear facility development since the inception of our dated--and still used--plants. Based on a conversation you are opposed to nuclear energy because of your fear of cancer? Cancer is everywhere and clusters <i>are</i> highly tracked because it is something we want to understand. That is knowledge, the search for understanding.

What "safer energy resources"? All of these countries that use nuclear power efficiently would use something cheaper in a heart beat, but it only exists today as a dream. Citizenry needs power to live and prosper.

Your diatribe is specious but do not back down, speak louder. It is important in a debate such as this that people opposed to advancement of the betterment of society be heard loud and clear.

BTW, you should understand your fear of the future and restraint of embracing the possibilities that lie ahead hurt you and your friends and family as much as those you oppose, right?

Please, take a half day and read up on the global application of nuclear energy, I am sure it will assuage your fears. The future will come no matter how aggressively you long for the past and the best way to shut down the nuclear plant in your back yard is to make it obsolete, which means newer, better technology.

Note: Nuclear energy accounts for 1/3 of Japan's electricity and this is done with safely with nuclear power plants built on a small, earthquake prone island.
06/20/08 15:47:58

Add Comments

This item is closed, it's not possible to add new comments to it or to vote on it