At the COP21, which is the 21st Conference of the Parties climate summit in Paris, delegates and scientists are trying to figure out how to reduce global warming. Within that discussion is a fierce debate between those who support the use of nuclear power for generating electricity as a means of cutting carbon emissions and
The U.S. hasn’t really engaged this debate. The assumption seems to be that nuclear can go forward with a few more safeguards. There’s also a sense that we’re fighting the last war–no tsunamis here, and we wouldn’t think of building anywhere near an earthquake fault, except on the East coast. GR
The nuclear renaissance in America has just taken a hit as the power company, Constellation Energy, gives up on its proposed nuclear plant on the Chesapeake Bay. Influenced by the condition of the economy as well as government regulation, it is observed that companies are now moving away from the nuclear alternative of electricity to
Nuclear energy is experiencing a comeback, with renewed interest in building power plants to supplement fossil fuels. But nuclear still hasn’t figured out what to do with spent fuel rods that will be radioactive for centuries. Finland plans to bury its waste for 100,000 years. Good luck with that.
This Letter to the Editor of the New York Times praises the Time’s recent editorial on the denial of a water permit to Entergy’s Indian Point nuclear plant. It contends that Indian Point provides not 30% of New York’s electricity but 12.5% at peak, and asserts that safer, non-nuclear alternatives exist.