The LA Times has a thoughtful editorialÃ‚Â today about movements to build new nuclear facilities in California.Ã‚Â Ã‚Â
There are someÃ‚Â considerable advantages of nuclear power.Ã‚Â As a kidÃ‚Â growing up in upstate New York, field trips to the Niagra Mohawk facility in Oswego, NY were an annual ritual (see kids, Nuclear Power is good).Ã‚Â And for all its advantages, the disadvantages are pretty major: dealing with toxic nuclear waste andÃ‚Â add new targets for terrorism.Ã‚Â
Our security at nuclear facilities still isn’t that great and that’s a concern.Ã‚Â Ã‚Â Ã‚Â Even if the nuclear waste processing/storage facility at Yucca Mountain in Nevada overcomes local opposition, there’s the matter of shipping the waste safely there.Ã‚Â By road; accidents happen.Ã‚Â By train; trains derail.Ã‚Â The arguement against solar and wind power is that its not always sunny and not always windy.Ã‚Â I’ll use the same logic as it applies to sipping nuclear waste. Accidents happen, and I certainly don’t want accidents like this happening anywhere near me.
I’d like to see further investment in alternative energy sources, specifically ways to reduce the cost of solar enegry.Ã‚Â OK, the sun is not always sunny and the wind isn’t always windy, but finding new ways to harness renewable fuel sources that are not toxic might be a better investment for California than nuclear energy.