TV Schedule

Is nuclear energy a clean solution for global warming?


  1. TouchArt
  2. related topics
Nuclear power: a cure for cheap electricity without greenhouse gases? Institute for Policy Studies: reports - NO

"By Nuclear Policy

Author(s): Robert Alvarez

The Global Nuclear Partnership (GNEP) is a major element of the Bush Administration’s energy policy. Its principal goal is to expand the world-wide growth of nuclear energy as a means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and fostering economic development. Under Bush's plan, the United States and its nuclear partners would sell power reactors to developing nations who agree not to pursue technologies that would aid nuclear weapons production, notably reprocessing and uranium enrichment.

To sweeten the deal, the United States would take highly radioactive spent fuel rods to a recycling center in this country. The foreign reactor wastes, along with spent fuel from the U.S. reactor fleet, would be reprocessed to reduce the amount that would go deep underground. Nuclear explosive materials, such as plutonium, would also also be separated and converted to less troublesome isotopes in a new generation reactors operated in the United States.

However, our investigation found that:

* GNEP is a rushed, ill-conceived, poorly supported and technically and economically risky expansion and redirection of the nuclear industry. None of the technologies and processes proposed for GNEP current exist in commercially viable applications and only a few have been demonstrated in large, engineering scale projects.
* Even if its unproven technologies are shown to be viable, GNEP also has the potential to inhibit the adoption of more reasonable solutions to global climate change by diverting resources into an unproven and, most likely, a prohibitively expensive nuclear option.
* GNEP also would increase the danger of nuclear proliferation and the potential for weapons grade materials falling into the hands of hostile or unstable nations and terrorist groups.
* GNEP will likely worsen the radioactive waste disposal problem and would also make the United States the dumping ground for nuclear wastes from the other participating nations...."

Follow the link to read the pdf of the full report.

Photo of U.S. Nuclear Power Plant Towers by Andre Jenny
Montpelier Vermont, USA
http://www.andrejenny.com/
Andre Jenny wrote, "Nuclear power plant cooling towers, in Limerick, Pennsylvania.
Steam rising from the cooling towers at Philadelphia Electric Company Nuclear Power generating station in Limerick in the State of Pennsylvania.
______________________

from your friends at TouchArt.net and OneEarthBlog.blogspot.com in New Mexico where our backyard has been designated a nuclear energy sacrifice area, even though there is already too much natural as well as military and corporate produced radiation.
TouchArt

28 responses
Is nuclear energy a clean solution for global warming?

  • The answer to the title of this article in a word is, NO. With an afterlife of over 25000 years, nuclear waste is not only a problem for us - but for most of the possible future of humans on this planet.
    notonourwatch
  • Nuclear waste is not a future we should be giving our children!
    JanforGore
  • Nuclear power plants may not produce any CO2 but they produce nuclear waste which never goes away and they use an enormous amount of water.
    philbangs
  • ".....use an enormous amount of water."

    OK..........set up your bio-fuel plant next to the nuclear plant and have a free ride in producing the bio-fuel by using the hot water and steam off of the nuclear plant to refine the bio-fuel. ( a very "green concept, I might add!)

    All I'm trying to do is to figure out a way I don't have to kiss some Arab's butt, just to drive my car........or to have my groceries delivered to the grocery store......since I have learned that the groceries don't come from the grocery store, I have learned that we are STILL going to need trucks (with fuel) to deliver stuff.

    OH.....and you people who are not in favor of nuclear fuel; you sound like an oil company spokesman, to me. And I want to take this opportunity to thank you and the oil companies for this climate catastrophe we are experiencing. We WOULDN'T have it as bad now if we had used nuclear power when we had the opportunity to go ahead and and develop it. The only reason we didn't develop it 30 years ago is because we encountered a period of slow growth in electrical demand, due to several electronic discoveries.

    No.....the Bush administration did NOT invent graft from the oil companies!

    And the government used that excuse to stop licensing new nuclear plants. They did it because the sugar daddy oil companies and coal companies weren't quite ready to have competition from a fuel that would produce more fuel then it consumed, while producing electricity. We had some quality control problems, along about that time, that can be solved. And.....we also have had our head in the sand about developing waste control, which can be solved also.
    cadsuch
  • I'm also up to HERE........with seeing GW's name linked with nuclear power......a word he can't even pronounce let alone understand.
    cadsuch
  • I dont know why we are even worried about it, 3 years ago Al Gore said that the planet was going to burn up in 10 years, so that only leads us 7 more years on the planet.
    clayjj05
  • Word. Opposing nuclear energy is the only sane choice. The nuclear energy industries propoganda may work well for some, but I've seen the results of uranium mining and nuclear radiation links and the Four Corners where my family lives in uranium rich. I don't want people in my community to die, so others can have cheap electricity.

    Renewable energy innovations are ready now.

    Speak out against devastating people and planet with radiation for electricity.

    There are better sustainable energy sources like solar and wind.

    Pass on the word about the SEIA's Solar Power Conference in San Diego October 13-16th.
    Congresspeople and Senators should know about advances in renewable energy technologies.
    TouchArt
  • Nuclear Energy is so much better then coal power. It seems like every summer there's a coal mine that collapses, trapping poor miners beneath the ground. Nuclear Energy Power Plants are still operating in the U.S. without any deaths in decades. We should have Nuclear Energy not Nuclear Weapons.
    Future_America
  • Does anyone here know about the new plants in France?
  • Seems like a pretty simplistic analysis. I mean, nuke plants put out less radioactive waste then coal plants, so there is a value to replacing coal with nuclear. Not a permanent solution, but a stopgap at least.
    cgranade
  • NO NO NO NO NO
    ILiveonaClock
  • Everyone realizes that if we continue to burn oil and coal, we won't even get to 100 of those 25,000 years, let alone all 25,000, right?
  • Thanks for bringing this up! The Bush administration's focus on Nuclear Energy is much more about taking care of wealthy constituents and saber rattling than anything else! It takes resources from truly Green energy alternatives!
    dirtydirtyd6
  • Nuclear waste storage is so unpopular that we cannot find anywhere to put it. Even Yucca Mountain has been a failure. Does it make sense to ramp up production?

    The French have no solution, either:

    "Today we stock containers of waste because currently scientists don't know how to reduce or eliminate the toxicity, but maybe in 100 years perhaps scientists will."

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/...
    enraptor
  • The French have toxic nuclear waste all over their west coast.


    Until science deals with the mining, leaks and toxic waste from the nuclear power industry, the cost in human life and to the environment is too high.

    Follow this link to see the health effects and loss of life from nuclear research at the National Labs at Los Alamos in Nothern New Mexico.


    TouchArt
  • Hear from Navajos about the dangers of uranium mining.
    TouchArt
  • "...I am not opposed to nuclear power and expect to see some modest increased use of nuclear reactors...
    ....my skepticism about nuclear power playing a much larger role in the world’s energy future is not the problem of waste disposal or the danger of reactor operator error, or the vulnerability to terrorist attack.
    ...[its] economics; the current generation of reactors is expensive, take a long time to build, and only come in one size - extra large...."

    -Al Gore
    http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/archives/c...

    http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/i-have-the-power/hot-tub-nuc...

    does anyone here possess any technical knowledge on this subject whatsoever?

    ....didn't think so.

    this is a scientific issue...not an idealogical one.

    your perceptions are deeply rooted in lack of understanding and images of fear and dread that have been present since the discovery of radioactivity. The development and use of nuclear weapons linked these images to reality and the mishandling of radioactive wastes from the nation's military weapons facilities has contributed toward creating a profound state of distrust that cannot be erased quickly or easily.

    http://www.redorbit.com/news/business/1375199/legislatu...
    http://www.eyeofscience.com/eos2/english/gallery/bakvir...
    http://www.ogj.com/display_article/328358/7/ONART/none/...
    http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2008/may/06/tva-design-con...
    http://www.victoriaadvocate.com/793/story/241949.html
    http://www.norden.org/webb/news/news.asp?id=7854&la...
    smorrisey
  • OK not that this isn't a complicated issue and there are there are a lot of valid arguments in favor of nuclear power in today's world, but NO!

    I'm sorry but we need to stop and think about the lives we are living. How much is enough? I say a lot less than we have now. As far as the groceries coming from the grocery store thought, think LOCAL agriculture. I say RELOCALIZE. I'm sorry if this sounds like we're going to go back and live in the stone age, because that's not what I'm proposing at all, but we live in a world that's reaching for the sky without looking at the ground.

    Our economics are based on cheap energy and the wonderful concept of infinite growth. You know what that sounds like to me? It sounds like a description for cancer. It keeps growing and growing and never stops... until its host is dead. Don't forget BTW, our host is this planet.
    Kati_kat
  • The widespread fear of nuclear energy is the product of mass hysteria and an effective propaganda machine from oil and coal companies.

    Nuclear energy is cleaner than coal. coal produces radioactivity that is emitted into the air, nuclear waste can be managed.

    Nuclear energy is not creating a situation apt for terrorism, a nuclear bomb needs weapon grade uranium, a vast difference from fuel grade uranium.

    Think about it people, where did all this fear come from?
    Silkwerm
  • The fear of radiation and nuclear pollution is real.
    Ask the Navajo uranium miners, ask the children of scientists at Los Alamos, read Madame Curie's autobiography like I did in grade school in 1960.

    Madame Curie didn't want to believe the fascinating ore she investigated was killing her, but her death was the proof. So are the millions of dead worldwide from messing with radioactive ores.

    The ancient people of the Pueblos of New Mexico knew about the yellow ore in their homeland and gave clear instructions that it is to be left alone.

    Read the testimony by Santa Clara Pueblo Potter Marian Naranjo a Tewa Activist, founder of H.O.P.E., Mother of 4 and grandmother to the U.S. Government about the damage to the people of Northern New Mexico from radiation and the ancient Pueblo teachings that described uranium as a Fiery Dragon trapped in the mountains sacred to the Tewa, and ends by telling them "to put it back."
    TouchArt
  • To answer the question as to whether any of us have any technical knowledge. Yes. Lots.
    Bet many intelligent Americans who have been paying attention do as well.
    Like most of the posters who oppose nuclear power, I have quite a bit of technical knowledge and have done lots of research since the mid-1960s about the science, history and politics of nuclear energy, uranium mining and radioactive waste.

    I also have the actual experience of living in the areas sacrificed to the nuclear power industries greed and lies and seen what damage it does first hand.
    My family and everyone in the Four Corners pay the real cost for the nuclear power industry's production of cheap electricity.

    So when people repeat Nuclear Energy Industry propaganda about safe, clean nuclear energy,
    mothers like me in New Mexico say NO, NO, NO.

    TouchArt
  • Bill Nye has never steered me wrong!
    media
    CarlosIsDown
  • Though nuclear energy is efficient, the wastes are a big problem. It seems that our government believes that if we put it underground, it will go away when some of these radioactive materials have a HALF LIFE of several thousand years. And all they can think about is what sign to warn future beings that this caved out mountain in Nevada is unsafe. :/
    anglcazn
  • Love Bill Nye The Science Guy. May kids did too.
    Good for him for speaking out, and thanks for sharing.

    Watch this video and hear Navajo uranium miners voices on the dangers or the Yellow Monster.


    TouchArt
  • Here's my post on current.com. it has the rest of the parts in the comment section.
    media
    CarlosIsDown
  • nuclear energy could work, stop being retarded tree huggers!
    clayjj05
  • dear clayjj05 its not the tree huggers who are being retarded... Its in fact most of america.

    When you say tree huggers I can only assume you mean hippies and its conservatives tied in with oil and coal who dont want to see this happen.

    Your comment was ill informed
    Silkwerm
  • Smorrisey,

    One of my best friends actually worked at a Nuclear Power Station. During my freshman year at Hiram College my class studied the problems of the Nuclear industry and in fact visited one that was close to us.

    Many years later, this same plant had some enormous problems too!

    Now, I happen to live in Pennsylvania, east of 3 Mile Island and at that time of the TMI partial meltdown, I was away for college and was scared for my family.

    Not many folks probably know this but, the danger was so real that one of the Catholic Clergy in that Diocese (not sure if it was the Bishop or Cardinal)
    gave a blanket absolution of all sins to area Roman Catholics....

    This is almost NEVER DONE at all as you can only
    be absolved of your sins through the Sacrament of Reconciliation which is given through a Roman Catholic Priest.

Add your response


Login/Registration is required to add a response.
  • about current

    Current is about what's going on in your world: all the things you and your friends are actually interested in -- that you won't find on any other news site or cable TV channel.

    Current.com is the place to find and share stories and videos that are interesting to you. It connects to Current TV, a global cable and satellite TV netwo