Monday Book Pick: Power to Save the World: The Truth About Nuclear Energy

Power to Save the World: The Truth About Nuclear Energy by Gwyneth Cravens

In honor of Lenin’s birthday, I’m going to repeat the Monday Book Pick from May 11, 2009. An environmentalist opposed to Nuclear Energy did some honest research and came to the conclusion that only Nuclear Power can provide the base load of clean electricity needed. Actual science trumps rhetoric.

Monday Book Pick Archive

Morning Roundup

Let’s review:

It didn’t take long for the left’s anti-science bias use the natural disasters in Japan to push their agenda:

Let’s review the facts of the matter, the nuclear power plant safety systems *survived the 8.9 magnitude earthquake*.

That is worth repeating. The nuclear power plant safety systems still functioned after a 8.9 magnitude earthquake.

It took an 8.9 magnitude earthquake, closely followed by a major tsunami to take them out.

Meanwhile, in California, dozens of people are killed by a natural gas explosion because the gas company can’t keep track of the type of pipe they have buried.

If you want to donate to a relief group that will help the Japanese people, check out Americares or the American Red Cross.

Don’t worry, our Dear Leader isn’t missing his regular 18 holes of golf because of the crisis in Japan.

Former democrat President Bill Clinton is channeling Sarah Palin now, and not how you would think.  Mr. Clinton is speaking out against our Dear Leader‘s ban on off shore drilling.

James O’Keefe exposed racism at NPR, which most of the MSM is strangely (or not so strangely) quiet about.

Liberals and socialists are mean-spirited, but we knew that…

 

China is building over 200 hundred new nuclear power plants

Given the huge number of horrifically dirty coal plans the Communist Chinese government has built, this is a good step for the environment.

What we should be doing in the US.  As Dr. Pournelle pointed out:

I have to say it again: cheap energy will cause a boom. The only cheap energy I know of is nuclear. Three Hundred Billion bucks in nuclear power will do wonders for the economy. We build 100 1000 MegaWatt nuclear power plants — they will cost no more than 2 billion each and my guess is that the average cost will be closer to 1 billion each (that is the first one costs about 20 billion and the 100th costs about 800 million). The rest of the money goes to prizes and X projects to convert electricity into mobility.

It’s the Green thing to do. Greenpeace founder Patrick Moore thinks so too:

I am not alone among seasoned environmental activists in changing my mind on this subject. British atmospheric scientist James Lovelock, father of the Gaia theory, believes that nuclear energy is the only way to avoid catastrophic climate change. Stewart Brand, founder of the “Whole Earth Catalog,” says the environmental movement must embrace nuclear energy to wean ourselves from fossil fuels. On occasion, such opinions have been met with excommunication from the anti-nuclear priesthood: The late British Bishop Hugh Montefiore, founder and director of Friends of the Earth, was forced to resign from the group’s board after he wrote a pro-nuclear article in a church newsletter. … Over the past 20 years, one of the simplest tools — the machete — has been used to kill more than a million people in Africa, far more than were killed in the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear bombings combined. What are car bombs made of? Diesel oil, fertilizer and cars. If we banned everything that can be used to kill people, we would never have harnessed fire. … the 103 nuclear plants operating in the United States effectively avoid the release of 700 million tons of CO2emissions annually — the equivalent of the exhaust from more than 100 million automobiles. Imagine if the ratio of coal to nuclear were reversed so that only 20 percent of our electricity was generated from coal and 60 percent from nuclear. This would go a long way toward cleaning the air and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Every responsible environmentalist should support a move in that direction.

Let’s review that last line again.

Every responsible environmentalist should support a move in that direction.

If you find a so-called “environmentalist” who is against Nuclear Power, they are either ignorant on the subject matter or a watermelon.

Is Obama going Nuclear?

It seems that our Dear Leader may actually keep one of his promises. According to Townhall.com:

The Obama administration’s planned loan guarantee to build the first nuclear power plant in the U.S in almost three decades is part of a broad shift in energy strategy to lessen dependence on foreign oil and reduce the use of other fossil fuels blamed for global warming.

President Barack Obama called for “a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants” in his Jan. 27 State of the Union speech and followed that by proposing to triple loan guarantees for new nuclear plants. He wants to use nuclear power and other alternative sources of energy in his effort to shift energy policy.

Obama in the coming week will announce the loan guarantee to build the nuclear power plant, an administration official said Friday. The two new Southern Co. reactors to be built in Burke, Ga., are part of a White House energy plan that administration officials hope will draw Republican support.

Yup, safe, clean nuclear energy. Plentiful electrical energy completely free of greenhouse gases.
Also good for the economy, as Dr. Pournelle stated:

I have to say it again: cheap energy will cause a boom. The only cheap energy I know of is nuclear. Three Hundred Billion bucks in nuclear power will do wonders for the economy. We build 100 1000 MegaWatt nuclear power plants — they will cost no more than 2 billion each and my guess is that the average cost will be closer to 1 billion each (that is the first one costs about 20 billion and the 100th costs about 800 million). The rest of the money goes to prizes and X projects to convert electricity into mobility.

Greenpeace founder Patrick Moore also thinks it is the ecologically sound thing to do.

I am not alone among seasoned environmental activists in changing my mind on this subject. British atmospheric scientist James Lovelock, father of the Gaia theory, believes that nuclear energy is the only way to avoid catastrophic climate change. Stewart Brand, founder of the “Whole Earth Catalog,” says the environmental movement must embrace nuclear energy to wean ourselves from fossil fuels. On occasion, such opinions have been met with excommunication from the anti-nuclear priesthood: The late British Bishop Hugh Montefiore, founder and director of Friends of the Earth, was forced to resign from the group’s board after he wrote a pro-nuclear article in a church newsletter.

Over the past 20 years, one of the simplest tools — the machete — has been used to kill more than a million people in Africa, far more than were killed in the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear bombings combined. What are car bombs made of? Diesel oil, fertilizer and cars. If we banned everything that can be used to kill people, we would never have harnessed fire.

the 103 nuclear plants operating in the United States effectively avoid the release of 700 million tons of CO2emissions annually — the equivalent of the exhaust from more than 100 million automobiles. Imagine if the ratio of coal to nuclear were reversed so that only 20 percent of our electricity was generated from coal and 60 percent from nuclear. This would go a long way toward cleaning the air and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Every responsible environmentalist should support a move in that direction.

A smart step toward American energy independence.

The Tennessee Valley Authority is bringing a new Nuclear Reactor on line, on schedule and on budget, in order to provide clean, “carbon free”, electricity in useful quanties, to their customers.

Clean and safe nuclear power is supported as the “green option” by serious leaders of the environmental movement, including Gaia theorist James Lovelock, Greenpeace cofounder Patrick Moore, and Britain’s Bishop Hugh Montefiore, a longtime board member of Friends of the Earth.

Of course, there are uneducated watermelon groups opposing this step toward clean, American engergy indepence, including the obviously confused “Southern Alliance for Clean Energy.”

The World’s First floating nuclear power plant

It’s not the one the Russians are building. Given the Russian’s record of failure with nuclear reactor’s and generally poor environmental record, any buyer’s are doing so at their own risk.

The world’s first floating nuclear power plant was built in the early 1960s by the United States Army Corps of Engineers. It was the MH-1A Sturgis, a converted WWII Liberty ship. The BBC falsely reported that the Russians were building the first floating nuclear power plant back in 2006, and other news agencies are still repeating their mistake.

Also posted at Urbin Technology.

Government Transparency, Obama Style!

Just how the porkulus money is being spent is something the Obama administration can’t tell us.

Posting “highly confidential safeguards sensitive” documents listing all the civilian nuclear sites and their activities in the United States on the Internet is apparently no problem.

I wish I was making this shit up. The official story is that this was an “accident“.

It would be comforting to think this was just another example of the incompetence that has been the norm for the Obama administration. However, given the mindset of the Obama political appointees who blocked the Justice Department staff lawyers from bringing charges of voter intimidation against the NBPP and by overruling the orders of two federal courts, stopped the State of Georgia from removing non-US citizens form their voter registration rolls, I can see one of those statist political appointee deciding that this is information that should be made available to the public. The actual threat to safety of American Citizens clearly isn’t part of their criteria.

Two interesting bits of energy news

First, the price of oil is going up. It’s over $66 a barrel and show signs of continuing to go up.
Ace thinks that our Dear Leader is going to loose some of his popularity as gas prices climb over $3 a galleon and shoot toward $4 a galleon.
Quite possibly, but then a lot of his supporters, like our Dear Leader, want gas prices over $4 a galleon. They want to kill the SUV and the suburban mom’s best buddy, the minivan. They want solar and wind power generation stations built, but not in their neighborhood.
The GOP should make the most of rising energy costs, and energy costs will rise due to the Cap & Tax scheme going through the democrat controlled congress, by pointing out how our Dear Leader and the democrats are blocking access domestic sources sources like oil, natural gas and coal. They are also blocking the choice of many serious environmentalists, Nuclear Power.
Ace may have a point, since unemployment is continuing to rise, and increased inflation is pretty much a sure thing.

The other bit of energy news comes from Planetizen. It seems that domestic underused natural gas capacity could almost completely replace our current coal-generated electrical energy. Natural gas burns much cleaner than coal and can be used to power motor vehicles as well. Coal can be converted to a liquid fuel, but it is generally less clean than using natural gas.

Bottom line, the spike in energy prices doesn’t have to happen, or at least it doesn’t need to be as bad. The spike will occur because Barack Hussein Obama and the democrats in Congress want higher energy prices to drive their political agenda. If the GOP can’t build a message around that, they are political incompetents who deserve to lose. The only problem with that that American people will pay the price of the democrat’s political agenda with a longer and deeper recession and a declining dollar as inflation climbs.

Obama blocks clean, safe & plentiful electrical power

The American Thinker reports that our Dear Leader is planning on killing any new Nuclear Power Plants by cutting funding for storage of what should be reusable fuel.

This is a clear indication that our Dear Leader feels that pandering to the watermelon moonbats that make up his base is more important than rebuilding the American economy and energy independence. Personally, I’m not surprised.