More than 60 percent of the region'’s electric power plants are powered by natural gas and oil, costly commodities that show no signs of abating in price, he said. Less costly power sources, such as nuclear, wind or liquefied natural gas, have encountered various levels of opposition across the region, decisions that have an impact on what a customer pays to keep the lights on, Mr. van Welie said.How much sense does this make: Public opposition is strongest against the three fuel sources that could support lowered carbon emissions. Add nuclear into the mix, and you get some price stability too. And this in a region that professes a desire to control GHG emissions?
"The fuel issue is dictated by politics,"” he said. "What we'’re trying to do is make the problem visible and tell everyone here is what the current system is costing us. Going forward, we need to get the New England governors to come together and make some of the tough political decisions that have to be made. There'’s no such thing as a risk-free decision, and we can'’t keep saying '‘no' forever."”
All I know is that as long as they continue to say "no", I can guess exactly what they're in for. Let's not say they weren't warned.
Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Power, Environment, Energy, Politics, Technology, Economics, New England
0 comments:
Post a Comment