Our Scott Martelle had an op-ed piece heading into the weekend for the Sacramento Bee, spinning off the disasters in Japan and urging U.S. policy makers to question the wisdom of nuclear energy, given the potential for disaster. From his article:
Given the scope of what we don't know, and thus can't plan for, and the propensity for humans to screw up, it's hard to give weight to assurances that all is safe. And this is the problem with our local, regional and national reaction to the crisis in Japan. We should not be asking whether our reactors are safe. We should be asking, given the potential effects of a meltdown, whether we want to be playing this game of Russian roulette in the first place.
There is an argument to be made that the risk of environmental disaster from nuclear energy is preferable to the assured ecological degradation that comes from coal-fired plants. But that argument assumes an either/or scenario, that we can choose long-term environmental catastrophe from coal, or fire up the nuclear reactors.
We know those are not the only options.
Most of California is blessed with an enviable climate that promises intense, harnessable sunshine nearly every day of the year. There is no environmental risk to capturing solar energy, and it is indefensible that the state does not require all new buildings to include solar panels on the roofs. The state already is making strides toward tapping wind power, though more could be done.
Comments