So despite continued efforts by greedy bureaucrats, high-priced lobbyists and a gaggle of company yes men, the nuclear crisis unfolding in Japan has been unable to escape the media spotlight.
What was once called an “example of nuclear power's safety record” by Eric Bolling of Fox Business, has now become a crisis on par with Chernobyl.
Following new assessments of radiation leaks from the Fukushima Daiichi plant, Japanese nuclear regulators raised their threat level from 5 to 7. This puts the disaster in “major accident” category.
And sadly, there's no “re-do” button here. There's no quick fix that'll take the radiation out of the soil, water and cells of thousands of Japanese citizens.
But hey, we need more power, right? And if history has taught us anything it's that no matter how stupid something is – if you've got enough special interests bankrolling it's success, it could still happen.
For years, nuclear advocates have told us that nuclear is safe and clean. And for years, I've insisted that it's neither. It's not clean because no one has figured out what do about the waste problem. And storing it in a mountain is not a solution – it's just a way for a few bureaucrats to get money and votes.
And safe? Not a chance.
Sure, they'll tell you that there have been no major nuclear safety problems in the United States since Three Mile Island. Although there have been quite a few close calls.
But guess what? Mother Nature doesn't care about safety records. And when she unleashes a magnitude 9.0 earthquake and showers us with a massive tsunami, all safety records become about as relevant as a typewriter ribbon.
And by the way, nuclear power generation is also one of the costliest forms of power generation there is. Without subsidies, it's simply too cost-prohibitive to pursue.
So essentially, we're talking about a form of power generation that is incredibly dangerous, insanely expensive, and not nearly as clean as many would like you to believe.
Yet we still entertain this idea that we can solve our energy problems by building more nuclear power plants. So here's my suggestion. . .
Every pro-nuclear politician that supports nuclear development must agree to live within at least a half mile of a nuclear power plant. As well, they must agree to take receipt of all waste generated by these power plants.
If they agree to that, then I'll believe it's safe enough to pursue. Until then, let's stop acting like nuclear power is a good idea, and focus our time and money on real clean power – like solar, wind, geothermal, energy efficiency and storage.
Nuclear accounts for about 20% of our power generation today. That 20% could easily be replaced with a healthy mix of renewable energy solutions, energy efficiency & conservation, and storage. And as an added bonus, if we do get hit with a major natural disaster, you won't need to worry about your solar panels or wind turbines giving you cancer.
Comment 
Subscribe to