“Old Foes Soften to New Reactors,” by Felicity Barringer, New York Times, 15 May 2005, http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/15/national/15nuke.html?hp&ex=1116129600&en=1c78e4248b7ee1c3&ei=5094&partner=homepage (from Democratic Underground).
As go Tree-Huggers
Several of the nation’s most prominent environmentalists have gone public with the message that nuclear power, long taboo among environmental advocates, should be reconsidered as a remedy for global warming.
Stewart Brand, a founder of the Whole Earth Catalog and the author of “Environmental Heresies,” an article in the May issue of Technology Review, explained the shift as a direct consequence of the growing anxiety about global warming and its links to the use of fossil fuel.
In his article, Mr. Brand argued, “Everything must be done to increase energy efficiency and decarbonize energy production.” He ran down a list of alternative technologies, like solar and wind energy, that emit no heat-trapping gases. “But add them all up,” he wrote, “and it’s just a fraction of enough.” His conclusion: “The only technology ready to fill the gap and stop the carbon-dioxide loading is nuclear power.”
In recent statements, three top environmental experts – Fred Krupp, the executive director of Environmental Defense, and Jonathan Lash, the president of the World Resources Institute and James Gustave Speth, the dean of Yale’s School of Forestry and Environmental Studies – have stopped well short of embracing nuclear power, but they have emphasized that it is worth trying to find solutions to the economic, safety and security, waste storage and proliferation issues rather than rejecting the whole technology.
So go Tough-Guys
The proposals that Senator McCain is considering would provide a 50-50 cost-sharing arrangement, amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars in subsidies, to gain federal certification for three new designs for nuclear plants. On Monday he met with Jeffrey R. Immelt, the chairman and chief executive of General Electric, which constructs nuclear plants.
It’s better to subsidize nuclear power by fighting lawyers than subsidizing oil by fighting Iraqis.
But the question — is this a Subversion [PISRR] of either the Green or Hawk movements by the other, or an actual new ideology?