“A convenient untruth” (Sept. 12) is exactly what this partisan screed is all about, but not in the way that Mark Henry has described it. Henry loves linking the Democratic party to the argument against nuclear power for purely pecuniary reasons, refers to the brilliant Helen Caldicott as just another anti-nuclear hysteric, and then predictably blasts the Green New Deal as a “delusion: a convenient untruth.”
Not mentioned anywhere in this wrong-headed rant is the fact that nuclear power is no longer the darling of the utility companies for the simple reasons that the spent fuel cannot be stored or transported without considerable risk to the public, nor is it cheaper to use than solar or wind-produced energy.
If Henry is really convinced that nuclear power’s reputation is “already distorted and unfair,” perhaps he should offer his own SLO backyard as a repository for a few spent fuel rods from the Diablo Canyon site.
What could possibly go wrong with such a glowing tribute to the nuclear power industry?
John Winthrop
Cayucos
This article appears in Sep 19-29, 2019.
This is an insane letter that lacks any truth or evidence. Nuclear power is the cleanest, safest, and most reliable source of energy we have. It is ESSENTIAL to decarbonize our society. No one has ever done it with anything other than nuclear power.
I agree. If we are truly serious about moving away from fossil fuels then we need to embrace nuclear power. Fear mongering must end now. Fewer people have died in the last 60 years of the Nuclear Industry than have died installing solar on rooftops. Please get informed and stop the insane banter. Our kids deserve better!
“..the spent fuel cannot be stored or transported without considerable risk to the public, nor is it cheaper to use than solar or wind-produced energy.”
Anti-nuclear ideologues (and charlatans who have made a career out of it) seem to believe if they repeat these falsehoods often enough they will become true.
1) Spent fuel has never, in its 60-year history, been responsible for harm to people, animals or animals, and 2) solar-and wind-produced energy might be cheaper alone, but no grid uses them that way (would only useful when the sun is shining or the wind is blowing). Unlike solar and wind, nuclear provides rock-solid, 24/7 electricity without help from polluting fossil-fuel gas.
For customers who need reliable, carbon-free energy, is there any choice?