Speaker after speaker at the Nuclear Energy Institute's Nuclear Energy Assembly, held on 16-18 May in Washington DC, weighed in with variations on a single theme: over the next 20 to 50 years, nuclear power is one of the few options, if not the only option, capable of providing reliable baseload electricity to meet increasing global demand without exacerbating global warming.


Of course the NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE is going to say that nuclear energy is the only way to go! It's stupid to say otherwise. It'd be like a vegetarian restaurant offerring meat alternatives or a mosque having Christian services on Sundays.




To Bodman, the way forward was clear: "We need to develop new sources of energy to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels, and help protect the environment." These new energy sources and new technologies include hydrogen fuel cells to power vehicles, more effective ways to produce wind and solar power, techniques for removing pollutants and green-house emissions from coal, and improved fuel efficiency. However, "there is one technology already in place that can reliably generate large amounts of electricity with no dependence on fossil fuels, no pollution, and no greenhouse emissions. That technology is nuclear power."


Yes. Great idea. Until we have a nuclear meltdown and there is no environment to protect. That's not even going into the nuclear waste that's going to be left behind. What ever happened to hydroelectric plants? All nuclear plants do is make water into steam anyway, right? So why not skip the nuclear part?






I'm rambling. This is just to waste time before lunch.


P.S. "Nuclear power should instead be among our foremost options for ensuring that we have safe, secure, affordable, and environmentally responsible supplies of energy."

3 comments | what do you think?