Cory Booker and others advocating for nuclear energy are wrong, IMO< for several reasons. One is how long it would take to get them going. A decade or more at least. We don't have a decade or two.
Two, imagine how much solar, wind and other green energy the world could build in that time frame with the tens of billions needed for nuclear energy.
And who would fund the nuclear plants? People lost billions years back when they tried to build a few nuclear plants in the northwest.
And of course there is the fact they are dirty and dangerous and perfect targets for terrorists.
It seems common sense we should start spending the tens of billions needed for nuclear, in green energy and mitigating GW in other ways like planting trees, and building more electric vehicles, etc.
Last years ago I read an article about how limited uranium is and it would be hard to get the needed fuel.
IMO, we should have a Manhatten project to curb global warming using all the green energy available.
Here is what happened in the 80's:
"
Pacific Northwest May Face a Long Rainy Day if 'Whoops' Bust
Add to list
On my list
By Jay Mathews
Jay Mathews Education writer and columnist Email Bio
December 29, 1982 Swept by a torrent of lawsuits and ballot box revolts, the Pacific Northwest is on the brink of an unprecedented financial disaster because of a nuclear building program that may quadruple electric bills, bankrupt several local communities and trigger one of the biggest bond defaults in U.S. history.
By March, officials here say, the Washington Public Power Supply System, which is responsible for building five huge nuclear plants, will have no money left to pay its creditors and will be forced into default if no help arrives. Two of the plants, although 17 percent and 23 percent complete, respectively, have been canceled.
But 88 utilities in three states have been told that they still owe $7 billion in principal and interest on the defunct plants even though they are never going to receive a watt of electricity from them.
washingtonpost.com |