Something from GreenPeace on the reemergence of nuclear power.

I have written a few entries about how I think that this push toward a hydrogen economy will actually be supported by nuclear power when all is said and done. This article that I found on Greenpeace.org examines some of the issues related to this reemergence.

The original article, by David Teather, was printed in the Guardian. Here's the link to the original Guardian article.

A few highlights:

A consortium of companies is applying for the first new permit to build a power plant in the US since the Three Mile Island accident.

Although officials claimed there have been no health-related effects from the accident, data from a nonprofit research group says that there have been significant negative health effects.

The article mentions a point of view from MIT that nuclear power is considered green because it doesn't release greenhouse gases.

That will be fine until the next major nuclear accident, and then what?

These companies also claim that nuclear power is necessary for national security. That claim is laughable considering that nuclear power plants make an excellent target for terrorists. (Note the line in the article that mentions how one of the 9-11 planes flew right over a nuclear power plant.) Acres of photovoltaic cells, if crashed into, would not have the same far-reaching effects that a terrorist-caused nuclear accident would have.

It is clear what the better alternative is, and it is clear from this example that US leadership is really not concerned about national security as they say they are. If they truly were, they would put aside their greedy concerns to control energy and they would do what is best for the people, to create a system using safer renewable energies. They are not doing this. Instead the administration in Washington has cut funds to research for alternative renewable Energies.

They still haven't figured out what to do with all the nuclear waste. Do you want that near your house?

It is clear what they see as a better future for the world. They envision a nuclear power future in which we must rely on huge corporations for our energy, as we do today. This is where the source of energy for the hydrogen economy will come from, if everything goes away they want it to. It won't be as clean as they are making it out to be.

A better solution would be to invest in research on alternative clean and renewable energies, and invest in research on transportation that could be powered with these energies. Efficient electric cars, powered by energy from wind or solar, would be a much healthier and much more secure form of power for the world. It would also allow people to generate their own power, which is why people in authority today want a hydrogen economy powered by nuclear power plants. They want to be in control of energy in the future, the way they are today.

Always account for political and economic power when trying to understand the actions of those who claim to lead us. By understanding their need to control, and maintain control, you can predict their actions with great accuracy.

Understanding this will bring you awareness. Use this awareness to create Something Better for the future.

Let me know what you think.

Universal