New nuke plants are incredibly expensive, about 3x the cost of wind.
In the US, nukes have limited legal liability due to special interest legislation. If you're crushed by a windmill, you can sue, but if a meltdown crushes a city, everyone there is limited to an insurance fund. This makes no sense.
Does anyone really think international nuclear power proliferation is a great idea? Why exactly should we be shouting to the world that nuclear power is the future for every country, everywhere?
Despite all that, I would support more nuclear power if that's what it takes to get some real effort to control CO2 emissions, which would mostly come from conservation, carbon sequestration, new technology, and increased renewables.
(And I won't trust anything Alexander says without citation. I think he had one cite in that speech.)
Space/Science » in reply to Lamar Alexander on the state of nuclear power in the U.S.
Re: Lamar Alexander on the state of nuclear power in the U.S.
The whole thread (16 posts)
- Lamar Alexander on the state of nuclear power in the U.S.