[{ "name": "Newsletter Promo", "id": "NewsletterPromo", "class": "inlineCenter", "insertPoint": "4", "component": "15264767", "requiredCountToDisplay": "0" },{ "name": "Ad - Medium Rectangle CC01 - 300x250", "id": "AdMediumRectangleCC01300x250", "class": "inlineCenter", "insertPoint": "8", "component": "2963441", "requiredCountToDisplay": "12" },{ "name": "Ad - Medium Rectangle LC01 - 300x250", "id": "AdMediumRectangleCC01300x250", "class": "inlineCenter", "insertPoint": "18", "component": "2963441", "requiredCountToDisplay": "22" },{ "name": "Ad - Medium Rectangle LC09 - 300x250", "id": "AdMediumRectangleLC09300x250", "class": "inlineCenter", "insertPoint": "28", "component": "3252660", "requiredCountToDisplay": "32" }]
To equate hazardous waste from the manufacture of solar panels with the extremely toxic radioactive waste generated by nuclear power stations–which will continue to require constant monitoring, redundant safety features and security, long after shutdown–is simply ludicrous ("Nuclear is the way to go," April 18). Reprocessing opens up a whole new toxic can of worms.
I also find it terribly ironic that people who want to promote nuclear generation as a "climate saving" energy source never seem to like renewable sources and continue to claim that they cannot fill our energy needs, ignoring data and examples from other countries/regions that prove otherwise.
Ellie Ripley needs to take her own advice and do her homework.
Cassandra Greene
Los Osos
Showing 1-2 of 2