More Reasoned Debate on Nuclear Energy

Whenever Patrick Moore, one of the co-founders of Greenpeace, makes the argument that many of his former confederates are beginning to reconsider nuclear energy as he has, he's often cast as a movement of one, or even a traitor. There are even some folks who are trying to write him out of the history of Greenpeace.

But anecdotal evidence that Moore isn't alone in making that re-evaluation keeps piling up. Here's Richard Leyton:

I’m a bit on the fence these days. A few years ago, the idea of a new generation of nuclear reactors was abhorrent. However, the last few years has led me to reconsider this. Whilst it’s clear there are inherent risks and problems associated with highly-radioactive fuel and reactors, the almost complete lack of carbon emissions makes it a compelling solution to our energy needs, without further clogging up the planet’s atmosphere. We’ve improved post-processing significantly, and if further consideration, research and debate on how we deal with spent fuel is undertaken, we can improve this most concerning aspect of it.

While that argument isn't unqualified support, it's a clear indication that more people are ready and willing to engage in reasoned public debate on the issue. And that's all to the good.

Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Environment, Energy, Politics, Technology, Economics, Climate Change, GHG