Nuclear power

Published: 1/14/2020 1:29:26 PM
Modified: 1/14/2020 1:28:36 PM

I am writing in response to your front page article about Joshua Goldstein’s opinions on the bright future of nuclear power on Jan. 7. First, in my opinion, this is an opinion piece in the guise of news.

Printing it without any counterpoint of other opinions, as a front page news story no less, is not responsible journalism. Second, nuclear power generation is not cheaper than coal and natural gas. From mining to energy production to management of the most toxic waste on the planet, it is all subsidized heavily by us taxpayers. Why? partly because it helps the U.S. government keep up its stockpile of nuclear weapons.

Third, yes, sure, nuclear power generation could be made safer, but it will never be safe. It uses some of the most incredibly noxious, lethal fuel imaginable (uranium) and generates all kinds of highly radioactive particles and materials that will be poisonous for millennia. (What nuclear power folks call “spent fuel” taken out of the reactors is in fact extremely radioactive.)

But that begs that question of why isn’t it safer than it is? The answer is that nuclear power is generated by profit-making companies that have an incentive to cut costs and rely on taxpayer bailouts. And it’s because the Nuclear Regulatory Commission doesn’t regulate the industry; it is in its pocket. Just ask the folks around the Plymouth Nuclear Station how clear that is to them!

Yes, sadly, there are some “environmental” groups that think nuclear power is a good bridge away from fossil fuels. And there are many, many more that know that anything that creates that much toxicity throughout the entire fuel cycle shouldn’t even be murmured in the same breath with “green.”

Ann Darling

Easthampton




Greenfield Recorder

14 Hope Street
Greenfield, MA 01302-1367
Phone: (413) 772-0261
Fax: (413) 772-2906

 

Copyright © 2019 by Newspapers of Massachusetts, Inc.
Terms & Conditions - Privacy Policy