Two highly educated academics said the way out of the energy/environmental degradation problem is nuclear power, and I’m part of the problem because I don’t agree. I’ll admit I am neither highly educated nor an academic and will not accuse them of being part of the problem because they differ with me. But here are reasons for my position:
Historically, the nuclear power disasters have caused irrevocable harm to Earth and quite frankly, Harrisburg and the Chesapeake Bay would be our Chernobyl except for some luck. And as a corollary, how would we protect the new and improved plants from terrorism? I confess it’s difficult to prove a negative, but safety must be absolute.
Even if engineers could design a perfect machine, industry can’t produce it. Remember the corporate world must build that nuclear power plant with basically the same incentives they have to build ignition switches for automobiles.
As I understand it, these “new” plants will operated by humans inclined to make mistakes. The professors haven’t found a way to make perfect people to run perfect plants.
How will we handle the radioactive waste from these new plants? We now have tons of deadly waste stored in plants around the country. If we decide that sticking this stuff in a mountain for thousands of years is OK, how do we get it there?
The learned gentlemen have made an unjustifiable leap of faith in the real world. And if they are wrong, the consequences for mankind are unacceptable.