Support the Timberjay by making a donation.
As an activist in the environmental movement since 1970, I must acknowledge a big mistake. It was understandable and well-intentioned, but a blunder nevertheless. I refer to the vehement opposition …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
To continue reading, you will need to either log in to your subscriber account, below, or purchase a new subscription.
Please log in to continue |
As an activist in the environmental movement since 1970, I must acknowledge a big mistake. It was understandable and well-intentioned, but a blunder nevertheless. I refer to the vehement opposition to nuclear power plants, and I regret participation in that.
It’s clear now that the risks of nuclear power generation were seriously overblown, and that coal-fired and gas-fired power production are significantly more dangerous in both the short and long term. It’s also clear that solar, wind, and conservation, as desirable as they are, will fail to provide enough decarbonization to make a crucial difference in climate change. Only nuclear as a base load power source can effectively replace coal/gas.
Sweden, France, and the province of Ontario have proven the efficacy, economics, and safety of nuclear power on a large scale, and it ramped up relatively quickly. The rest of the world should follow their lead. At this time, it’s the wisest course to take, and perhaps our last opportunity establish energy security and avoid catastrophe.
Peter M. Leschak
Side Lake