All in for atomic energy

Last summer, I spent three months interning for C-SPAN in our nation’s beautiful capital.

My responsibilities included following around the camera crews as they set up their gear to film live events in the city. The vast majority of the lectures and presentations I attended were rather dry, to say the least.

As a politics enthusiast, I cannot imagine how some of my friends would have handled a four-hour speech on tax policy.

But of all the shoots I tagged along for, the most impressive speech I remember was one by Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., on the benefits of nuclear power. Go figure, right?

Nuclear power is still largely ignored as a viable alternative to fossil fuels.

I haven’t had too much experience in energy policy, but it seems from a superficial examination that nuclear power has many positive aspects, despite its rather negative reputation.

Whether or not it is actually occurring, global warming has invigorated the search for greener energy sources.

Nuclear power does not release any particulates or emissions, as the fission process is entirely self-contained.

Nuclear power already generates about one-fifth of the nation’s power, and supporters claim it could provide much more as fossil fuel plants fall by the wayside.

Public support of nuclear power is also at a record high of 62 percent, according to a Gallup poll conducted in March. BP, on the other hand, topped out at a whopping 16 percent approval rating.

France generates three-quarters of its power from nuclear sources, and Russia, South Korea and Japan all plan to increase their nuclear power capabilities during coming years.

Of course, detractors have made numerous arguments against expanding the United States’ nuclear power capabilities. Their most convincing arguments, however, aren’t environmental — or even political — in nature.

As Anna Aurilio, of Environment America, said, “When time and money is of the essence in fighting (global warming), nuclear basically fails on both counts.”

A new nuclear power plant can take more than a decade to build and can cost upwards of $6 billion. Environmentalists claim geothermal, wind and solar power sources are quicker to build and less costly to operate.

However, there are many problems associated with these “green” energy sources that nuclear power avoids.

Solar power can only be generated during daylight hours, wind power requires, well, wind and geothermal power is extremely temperamental.

The days of Chernobyl and Three Mile Island are long gone. Even the world’s most famous idiot nuclear plant worker, Homer Simpson, has faded in the twilight of sitcom fame.

Nuclear power is one of the most powerful technologies ever developed by man. Its various forms can either power a country or level a city.

Fossil fuels cannot last forever. It might not be in our lifetime, but they will run out. We must avoid short-sighted fixes and build for our future.

Our future lies in nuclear power.


E-mail: halderfe@indiana.edu