nuclear waste=evil

This is a response to the conservative blog VermontTiger:

http://www.vermonttiger.com/content/2010/02/take-a-breath.html

I am disturbed by this conversation on several levels:

1. First and foremost; how can anyone talk about nuclear power without even mentioning radioactive waste? This is irresponsible to the core. The fact of the matter is that our self-indulgent, short-sighted, me-now culture cannot even talk about how we are creating a radioactive dead zone that will stay here on the beautiful banks of the Connecticut River for MILLENIA. There is no action that we are taking that is so profoundly bad for our future generations then the creation of such an evil by-product. This factor alone should eliminate any desire to build more nuclear power plants.

2. My Confusion: It is here, on the VermontTiger, that I was first introduced to the controversy that CO2 may not even be a factor in climate change (Thanks to Daniel Foty). But while my skepticism grows (I’m not totally convinced), there are others that are using reduced CO2 emissions to promote the growth of the nuclear industry. Which is it, VermontTiger? You can’t have it both ways (without being hypocritical).

3. Green Jobs: This moniker has become completely meaningless since it means whatever the speaker wants when they want it.

4. The rap against renewable energy: While, yes, the creation of solar panels is not the “greenest” of processes, much of that is tied to the use of aluminum as well as purifying silicon. Do the opinionators of this website suggest we shut down all industry that is reliant on these two resources? What would that do with our business/technology industry as a whole? Anyways, anything in the manufacturing of solar panels is small potatoes compared to the hazards of uranium mining and purification. Solar panels when they are installed will produce very clean energy for an undetermined time (the first commercial panels from the 70’s are still producing). Renewable energy also means hydropower, biomass, passive solar and solar hot water, all technologies with a low chemical footprint.

5. Probably the most disappointing aspect of this conversation is the sense of ENTITLEMENT people feel to endlessly receive unlimited amounts of cheap electricity. Vermonters survived quite well without electricity for nearly 200 years. Now, we feel the state must guarantee us cheap limitless power. Plus, there are many who feel that through measures of private and public CONSERVATION, we could significantly reduce our electricity needs. But, of course, our Republican administration favors cuts in our energy efficiency programs. And in regard to wind turbines marring our landscape, have you ever heard anyone refuse to come to VT because of those hideous powerlines scarring our mountainsides? Or those terrible scars cut by ski areas into the sides of our mountains? Or how we’ve criss-crossed our entire state with that black gooey tar?

It seems natural to me that CONSERVATIVES would be into CONSERVATION, not a technology that will leave a poisoned landscape for millennia of generations.