Letter to the Editor 2/16

By David Hughes

published: Mon, 15 Feb, 2010

To the Editor,

I am writing in response to your January 31 editorial, “Obama’s energetic endorsement.” It is one thing to talk about money Pitt gets from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for its nuclear engineering program, but it is a big leap to support nuclear power. In addition, the American Nuclear Society  is not a bias-free source on nuclear power. It is a pro-nuclear organization and should not be touted as a fair, independent source on nuclear power questions.

The issue as to whether or not a nuclear plant can explode like a bomb has not yet been resolved. In fact, one of the reasons why people were evacuated in Pennsylvania during the Three Mile Island accident is because of the fear that a hydrogen bubble building up inside the reactor might explode and breach the containment.

The editorial is really confusing on the issue of radioactive waste disposal. On the one hand it makes the vague comment that Obama “seems to have other plans in mind to dispose of it,” while recognizing that the government is likely to close down the waste storage facility at Yucca Mountain, Nevada — the only place designated to store highly radioactive waste. The point is there is no way to safely store the waste from nuclear plants.

The editorial again cites the ANS to claim that nuclear plants are not harmful to the environment. This is the false line of the nuclear industry and the right wing. To claim that nuclear power is as clean as wind and solar power is laughable. First of all, nuclear plants routinely vent some of the deadliest gases known to exist. Second, when taking into account the entire fuel cycle, nuclear power does contribute to climate warming. Commercial-grade uranium pellets are not dug out of the ground ready to undergo fission in a reactor. There is a long process to make that uranium readyfor commercial use, and this process emits greenhouse gases.

The editorial refers to nuclear power as a “new energy source.” Nuclear power is not a new source of energy. In fact, it is considered one of the “mature” technologies. More importantly, it is one of the most expensive ways to generate electricity.

Getting federal dollars for Pitt’s nuclear engineering program does not justify promoting dirty and unsafe sources of energy. That is retrograde thinking. We can combat climate change and become energy independent completely through the increased use of energy-efficient and renewable energy technologies.

David Hughes

Executive Director

Citizen Power