Climate of Our Future

Last week, President Bush made a symbolic visit to the Brown’s Ferry Nuclear Reactor to promote his version of the energy bill; one that includes provisions for increased nuclear energy use, among other questionable positions.

Overall, his speech was peppered with bad ideas such as liquid coal as an alternative fuel source. He supports the most regressive policies meant to appear concerned with energy independence, but thinly disguising his interest in making things as easy as possible for his friends in the fossil fuel industry. As is his wont, Bush opposes pesky regulations and any hard numbered targets for fuel efficiency.

Going beyond that, he’s pushing nuclear energy as a key component to any “climate change” solution. I don’t know if the American people have short memories, but returning to a dependence on Nuclear Energy without having addressed the many safety concerns that led to its declining use, especially in a political atmosphere that favors little or no government regulation, is a very bad idea.

The Guardian Unlimited coverage of Bush’s speech has the following short summary of his Nuclear Power position:

Bush proposes jump-starting the industry - stalled after the partial meltdown of Pennsylvania’s Three Mile Island in 1979 - by reducing regulations, allowing nuclear fuel processing and approving a nuclear waste repository in Utah. He called it energy that is abundant, affordable, safe and clean, a position some environmentalists have now adopted. (see Bush Touts Proposal to Cut Back on Gas for the full article)

Beyond the issues of safety and maintenance for the facilities themselves, which have been plagued by leaks and other technical failures usually due to very lax oversight by the federal government, there is the tremendously problematic need for waste storage. For several years, the government has been pushing the proposed Yucca Mountain storage site as the answer to this particular problem, but that’s a solution that has many people worried, especially those living in the areas where the waste will be transported to and through.

The state of Nevada is agressively trying to prevent the site from getting built. There is a website — YuccaMountain.org — that contains all the latest news on their efforts, and it’s a great resource for information. One very interesting recent item they link to, is an article about a Department of Energy website that’s being used to promote the storage site to children through a cartoon character called “Yucca Mountain Johnny” (see the Las Vegas Review Journal article House pans Yucca Internet strategy).

Yucca isn’t just a concern for Nevada, however, it’s also a reason for worry for anyone living in the rural areas, towns, and cities through which the waste gathered from temporary storage facilities acros the US will be shipped via truck and rail (see Nuke waste routes discussed). The specific route hasn’t been set yet, but when it is (if it is) there is sure to be more outcry from across the country. The prospect of a derailment and potential target for terrorist attack is enough to get most people concerned.

It’s certainly not a situation anyone is going to feel good about without tight regulation and constant oversight. Unfortunately, our President doesn’t believe that either of those commitments is good for the economy. Contaminating our earth with nuclear waste that takes 10,000 years to degrade doesn’t sound very good for it either.