Green, glowing green

Nick is nuts.

How to write: Lesson 117
Label yourself "Green" and then write pro nuclear power advocacy. Hint - don't study the topic or it will be too hard to end on an upbeat, pro nuclear conclusion.

Green, glowing green

What killed nuclear power in the past was cold economics. Major studies at M.I.T. and elsewhere show that nuclear power is still a bit more expensive than new coal or natural gas plants, but in the same ballpark if fossil fuel prices rise. And if a $200-per-ton tax was imposed on carbon emissions, nuclear energy would become cheaper than coal from new plants.

The US subsidizes the disposal of nuclear materials so the cost of nuclear energy is not the cost to generate but the total cost including 250,000 years of safe storage. That makes nuclear very expensive and a tax burden.

Radioactive wastes are a challenge. But burdening future generations with nuclear wastes in deep shafts [in Nevada] is probably more reasonable than burdening them with a warmer world in which Manhattan is submerged under 20 feet of water.

How can he say that nuclear poison is better than a raising sea level ? Is it laziness to not care about the seriousness and difficult of nuclear waste storage or is Nevada far enough to not care?

A NYTimes columnist thinks it's okay to poision somewhere else outwest. Well Ohio thinks the smog they generate isn't too much a price to pay for OH energy but that smog blows to NY. Kristoff isn't "Green" he's NotInMyBackYard.

BTW if we stopped all carbon fule combustion today, the sea levels are going to rise anyway.

Nick is nuts. We're going to have sea level rise so
Nick, here's some footwear and
stop being a NIMBY-Green.