Please share far and wide!

Search This Blog

Saturday, January 9, 2016

Letters to the Editor -- Claim That Nuclear Is Green is "Nonsense"

To the Editor:

It is easy to see the nuclear power industry is desperate. Their latest deception is that running nuclear stations does not contribute to climate change.

Increasingly we see commentaries in newspapers from representatives of the industry asserting that nuclear power is some sort of a green energy. This is nonsense. The entire nuclear fuel cycle from mining and milling uranium, transportation of radioactive materials, uranium enrichment, and fuel fabrication, all involve heavy use of fossil fuels. Constructing nuclear stations is also fossil fuel intensive as are stabilizing and cleaning up nuclear catastrophes (Chernobyl and Fukushima).

Gov. Andrew Cuomo's recent directive that the state Public Service Commission should consider treating nuclear power as renewable electricity is ridiculous. Doing so would retard the much-needed transition to increased conservation and energy efficiency. and safe, renewable electricity sources.

New York is far too heavily dependent on atomic power. Two of the six nuclear stations in New York state are more than 45 years into their operating lives, there others more than 35 years, and the youngest more than 25 years. These are old reactors. To pretend they can be safely operated (and at full power) indefinitely is very dangerous thinking. We have pushed our luck with nuclear power far too long.

The day may come when a nuclear catastrophe somewhere in North America forces the quick and permanent closure of all the nuclear stations in the country. Then what? New York politicians and energy planners will look foolish because suddenly their make-believe high percent of electricity from "renewable" sources will be gone.

Let's invest in safe, renewable electricity, efficiency, and conservation, creating permanent, high paying, desperately needed jobs for New Yorkers instead of further risking everything we have ever built here.

Tom Ellis
Citizens' Environmental Coalition


  1. Concrete production, transportation & pouring is extremely fossil-fuel intensive.

    Some hypotheticals:

    Quote: "The 2016 Atlantic Hurricane Season was a hyperactive Atlantic Hurricane Season that produced 21 named storms, second all-time to 2005, and the first Category 5 Atlantic Hurricane since Felix in 2007. The season began on June 2 with the formation of Tropical Storm Alex. The season's extreme activity was attributed to a strong developing La Nina event, which followed the Very Strong El Nino of 2015-16 that limited Atlantic tropical cyclone formation. Ending a drought of Atlantic tropical activity, the season included 10 hurricanes and 5 major hurricanes."
    ... "First storm formed" "June 2, 2016"
    ... "Total damages" "$114 billion (2016 USD)"
    ... "Total fatalities" "2,016"
    . from:
    . see also:

    Now something more immediate although unlikely to make landfall in continental N/A:

    Prepare for the worst,
    and hope for the best.
    Shut down all the aged Fukuppy-like Mark I Garbage-Mashers.

    1. Concrete is cheap. Nuclear puts out no carbon. Takes carbon to mine everything. Your argument is a non starter.

    2. When you consider actinide recycle then nuclear is renewable. Its only waste if you dont recycle waste.


Insightful and Relevant if Irreverent Comments