Nuclear power
Proponents
of nuclear power argue that it is both a safe, clean and renewable energy
source argue which should be given a prominent part of the overall mix
of energy sources to help feed the region's growing demand for energy.
Opponents point to Chernoybl as a tragic example of the threat to human and environmental health posed by deadly radioactive pollution. The critics claim that no matter how sophisticated the design and management of safeguard systems, the immensely destructive consequences from a single mistake disqualifies nuclear power from consideration as a "sustainable energy" source.
Candidate views
In the presidential campaign, both Obama and McCain have included nuclear power as a viable part of the national energy mix, although highlighting the differences in their approaches.
McCain proposes building 45 new nuclear plants by 2030, which would "provide 7,000 jobs for American workers." His ultimate goal is to construct 100 such plants. In his Lexington Project strategy, McCain says:
Nuclear power is a proven, zero-emission source of energy, and it is time we recommit to advancing our use of nuclear power. Currently, nuclear power produces 20% of our power, but the U.S. has not started construction on a new nuclear power plant in over 30 years. China, India and Russia have goals of building a combined total of over 100 new plants and we should be able to do the same. It is also critical that the U.S. be able to build the components for these plants and reactors within our country so that we are not dependent on foreign suppliers with long wait times to move forward with our nuclear plans.
McCain's proposal to subsidize the building of nuclear plants has been criticized as simply too expensive, especially in comparison with public investment in other energy alternatives. Other problems with nuclear beyond their high cost and safety risks, are its radioactive waste products, as well as the security aspects. One of the byproducts of reprocessed nuclear fuel is plutionium -- a key ingrediate in making nuclear weapons.
Rejecting the charge that he is "anti-nuclear," Obama has instead said (in his acceptance speech in Denver) he will "find ways to safely harness nuclear power." In his "New Energy for America" plan, Obama calls for "safe and secure nuclear energy," pointing out that:
Nuclear power represents more than 70 percent of our non-carbon generated electricity. It is unlikely that we can meet our aggressive climate goals if we eliminate nuclear power as an option. However, before an expansion of nuclear power is considered, key issues must be addressed included: security of nuclear fuel and waste, waste storage, and proliferation.
This more cautious approach highlights the need to safeguard nculear material abroad and in the U.S. as "a top anti-terrorism priority." On nuclear waste, Obama opposes storage at Yucca Mountain, while calling for "federal efforts to look for safe, long-term disposal solutions based on objective, scientific analysis," while also developing requirements "to ensure that the waste stored at current reactor sites is contained using the most advanced dry-cask storage technology available."
Other views
New York Times - "Two endorsements of nuclear power, but sharp differences on detail," Larry Rohter, October 9, 2008.
Christian Science Monitor - America warms up to nuclear power
Department of Energy - Moving ahead with a new nuclear age
Energy Information Administration - U.S. data
Frontline - Why do Americans fear nuclear power?
Greenpeace
- End the nuclear age
How Stuff Works
- How nuclear power works
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
- ABCs of nuclear science
Massachusetts Institute of
Technology - The future of nuclear power
New Scientist
- The nuclear age
Nuclear Energy Institute - the clean
air energy
Nuclear Files -
Nuclear Information and Resource Service -
Resources for the Future - The future of nuclear power
Sustainable
Energy Working Group
Sustainable
Energy Coalition - Nuclear safety
Taxpayers for Common
Sense - Nuclear industry subsidies
Union of
Concerned Scientists - Nuclear safety
US Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Wikipedia -
Nuclear power
Wilson
Quarterly - Nuclear power: Both sides
World
Wildlife Fund - Why not nuclear power?
Worldwatch - Nuclear
power inches up
World
Resources Institute - Nuclear energy consumption
