Nestled in the energy bill that Congress approved last week is perhaps the most tangible evidence yet that nuclear power, long shunned by many as a dangerous energy source, is on the verge of a comeback.In a recent interview, Patrick Moore repeated his call for expanded use of nuclear energy:
The broad energy plan includes billions of federal dollars to jump-start production of nuclear reactors. The incentives, from tax breaks to loan guarantees, come at a time when soaring oil prices and increasing public concern about global warming have forced even some leading environmentalists to rethink their opposition to nuclear power as a cleaner, cheaper alternative to traditional fossil fuels.
"Nuclear (power), in combination with renewables, is the only source of electrical energy that can replace coal and gas to a significant degree," said Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore, now chairman of Greenspirit Strategies of Canada, which helps companies develop environmentally friendly policies.
Should the government incentives prove enticing, the nation's utilities are poised to order their first reactors since the 1970s.
"We need a lot more electricity in this country in the decades ahead," said Steve Kerekes, spokesman for the Nuclear Energy Institute, a trade group for nuclear utilities. "Nuclear (power) is not by itself the answer, but it's part of that diversity of (sources) that will fill the gap."
"Today, we have 6 billion people who need food, fuel and material every day, and we need to find a way to provide them.On the international front, Armenia now plans to build new nuclear power plants:
"With the exception of Chernobyl, which for design reasons was an accident waiting to happen, we have a good record with nuclear power. It’s even safer than coal, when you consider people who die in coal mines. Three Mile Island contained radiation in an accident about as serious as it could get. It was a success, but scary. “The China Syndrome” just came out, and we thought we were all going to die. In the end, no harm was done. We have 441 reactors operating as we speak, and all have good safety records. Chernobyl is the exception that proves the rule.
..."Coal-fired plants emit a great deal of air pollution. They are improved but still a burden. They also release a great deal of carbon dioxide, which I don’t view as pollution, since it is plant food. But CO2 is thought to be part of the global warming trend, so it’s prudent not to increase it.
"Also, we need to preserve valuable non-renewable resources like coal, oil, and gas — not just for energy, but for other things we can use them for, like making plastics. It’s a shame we are burning them all up. Uranium, on the other hand, has no known use other than energy production.
The government of Armenia believes the construction of new nuclear power units is a strategic goal to maintain and enhance the republic's energy security and independence, Armenian Prime Minister Andranik Markaryan said Friday.Come back this afternoon for more news from the NEI Clip File.
Markaryan held a meeting with chief of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Muhammad El-Baradei who is currently visiting Yerevan.
El-Baradei said the IAEA could assist Armenia in conducting feasibility studies for the construction of a new nuclear power station.
The IAEA chief said that Armenia had made significant progress in enhancing the safety of the country's nuclear power station but much had yet to be done. He suggested the drafting of a systematized plan with an outline of the project's timeframe and financial breakdown to simplify creditors' efforts.
Markaryan said Armenia was committed to using nuclear energy for peaceful purposes only and pursuing a nuclear non-proliferation policy.
Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Environment, Energy, Politics, Technology, Economics
0 comments:
Post a Comment