Re: [cdn-nucl-l] Environmentalists For Nuclear Energy

[AtomicRod@aol.com]

In a message dated 10/19/02 12:18:03 PM, jerrycuttler@rogers.com writes:

>AS A DEDICATED environmentalist, I consider it a paradox to see today
>  some environmental groups such as Greenpeace opposed to nuclear energy.
>
>  Nuclear energy can be a very clean energy if it is well-designed,
>  well-constructed, and well-operated:
>
>  It produces almost no carbon dioxide and other pollutants, ejected in
>  huge quantities into the atmosphere by the use of fossil fuels (millions
>  of tons of sulphur and nitrogen oxides and about 30 billion tons of CO
>  are dumped every year into the atmosphere).
>
>  It is very compact (little space is required, unlike generators of
>  solar, wind and biomass energy).
>
>  It produces a very small volume of waste, which decays spontaneously.
>
>  It does not contribute to the greenhouse effect.

Yes, with the above facts in hand, one could feel that there is no logic at 
all to the fact that groups claiming to be "environmentalists" do not like 
nuclear power.

However, I believe that the world is, in fact, rational, so maybe there is 
another possibility.

Since the following is also true, perhaps the antinuclear groups simply do 
not want something to replace coal, oil and gas. IOW, perhaps they are merely 
shills for fossil fuel suppliers.

 >To combat the greenhouse effect and the consequent global-warming trend,

  >nuclear fission is the only source of energy that can replace a

  >significant part of the fossil fuels coal, oil and gas without polluting

  >the atmosphere.

Rod Adams