Common sense on nuclear power ?

The political left has opposed nuclear power just as it tried to ban nuclear weapons. Of course, it didn’t matter to them that the Soviets were not going to comply. It was enough, or maybe the real purpose, to disarm the west. The Cold War ended with the Soviet Union collapsing. Opposition to nuclear power remained a remnant of the old “Ban-the-Bomb” mentality. The fact that the ban added to generation of greenhouse gases (Not that I believe they are a major factor in climate), was not important. Nuclear power was evil because….. Well, it was just evil.

Aside from the emotional aspect, the left has claimed that it is unsafe and too expensive. The safety question is often answered with the riposte that more people have died in Ted Kennedy’s car than from nuclear power, at least in the US. The Soviet accident at Chernobyl was due to the general crudity and disregard for safety that was true of most of the Soviet Union. They, and even the post-Soviet Russians, have lost nuclear submarines to such bungling right up to the last decade. Now, with the global warming hysteria, there might be some common sense appearing on the political left. It probably doesn’t mean that real knowledge and judgement are appearing, just that they are now more afraid of global warming than of nuclear power. Still, I don’t require the motive be correct if the action is desirable.

It makes no sense to see natural gas used to generate electricity when natural gas prices are climbing and it is the ideal fuel to heat homes. Nuclear power is an ideal method for generating electricity but is blocked by ignorant emotion. Interestingly enough, before global warming was attributed to CO2, Scientific American, a popular science journal, unfortunately contaminated by left wing politics, was expressing worry about the waste heat from nuclear plants as source of global warming. That 1960s theory has been superseded by the current dogma.California has now become dependent on natural gas for electricity generation. A recent report states: “California’s electricity and natural gas markets have become closely inter-related since natural gas has become the predominant fuel for electricity generation. The growing demand for electricity is, in turn, driving the increasing need for natural gas supplies throughout California. The role of natural gas in electricity generation affects how the natural gas systemmust be designed and operated.”

This is not healthy. One reason is that natural gas is also derived from unstable political areas like the Middle East. Huge liquified natural gas carriers are floating bombs that may attract terrorist attention. Natural gas is not the answer. Will the political left allow the industry to recover?

They complain about cost when a large share of the cost is due to perpetual litigation generated as a rear guard action by themselves. The legal costs are chiefly those of litigation-driven regulatory actions. Perfect safety is demanded while other energy systems have less than a perfect record. Coal, for example, has a major role in chronic respiratory disease and deaths. The other major issue is spent fuel but this is technology and, given a revived interest in building and using plants, it will eventually respond to renewed research. Reading these left wing blog comments, one can see that opposition is still intimately tied to opposition to nuclear weapons. Unfortunately, 30 years of inaction in energy production has seen a proliferation of nuclear weapons all over the world that did not require nuclear power plants to produce the fuel. Ask Iran.

10 Responses to “Common sense on nuclear power ?”

  1. Vivian Louise says:

    I’ve never understood the opposition to nuclear energy. It’s economical, safe, clean and powerful. Hello!!! It’s the bomb. 😉

  2. Brett King says:

    Vivian Louise your parting comment cracked me up! If we just remined the liberal left that the French depend on nuclear energy they’ll be sure to approve of it.

  3. Nancy says:

    Mai oui, Msr. King!

  4. Eric Blair says:

    Say, Dr. K. and all: what do the French do with their nuclear waste, since we are all concerned about that topic? I personally think that we should just do with our nuclear waste what the French do, and tell the greenies to pound sand if they don’t like it. Or urge them to give up their Francophilia.

  5. allan says:

    In an ideal world these people would not be allowed access to any outlets in which to plug in cuisinarts, blow driers, computers, refrigerators, pool pumps, alarm systems, or chandeliers. Oppose oil drilling? No boarding passes to Paris, London, or Bali. And no more fuel for your private jets, either. Just flap your gums a little faster.

  6. qdpsteve says:

    Hey Dr. K. Nice new blog you have here. Be a shame if something happened to it… 😉

    Hello again to Eric too, and I still wish you’d come on back to the Swamperoo. We miss ya!

    And to everyone, a related link of interest. Nice to see there’s still some relatively sane Democrats around (besides me, of course).

  7. Eric Blair says:

    Three cheers for the Q!

  8. Eric Blair says:

    Seriously, qdpsteve, hope all is well.

  9. Steve, I didn’t start this blog to dismiss the Swamp. I wanted to be able to post serious topics without trollish snipes. It’s hard to be serious when a child is constantly interrupting. There is room for both.

  10. Vivian Louise says:

    It’s hard to be serious when a child is constantly interrupting.

    I’m so tempted to ask if we are there yet…

    I’m enjoying the posts, and the links. So much to learn yet.