I thought it would be good to promote a solid energy plan for this country instead of Obama’s favorite choice wind. I really think Obama is caving to a giant special interest group: General Electric (GE). GE not only makes wind turbines, but they are a biggest propaganda factory for the left. Remember, GE also owns MSNBC and give loads of money to Democratic cronies in Washington. I have no problem pursuing wind energy if nuclear energy is also pursued.
What type of alternative fuels can be used to reduce CO2 and greenhouse gases? Today, in the United States, the main sources of fuels to generate electricity are fossil fuels and coal, and both of these are about the worst in generating greenhouse gases. There is an abundance of coal in the United States. However, it may be a couple of decades before coal can be processed in a clean matter on a large scale. Once this happens, coal will be a viable option. Clean coal processing is years away because the technology is expensive to filter the CO2 gasses. New coal processing plants will have to be built since existing plants cannot be retrofitted to accommodate the technology. The other issue with clean coal production is how to store or eliminate excess CO2 gasses. Many theorize the captured CO2 emissions in clean coal production can be released below the Earth’s surface, without harming the environment on the surface of the planet. Once again, even if this is correct, it is an expensive process to eliminate the excess CO2 waste. In the meantime, the United States will continue to use coal as a dirty energy source to keep up with growing energy demands (population growth). Hydro, solar, wind, and nuclear are also used and are cleaner renewable sources, but they compose a small portion of the energy being created in the United States. The most efficient energy source for creating the most return for the buck is nuclear. Unfortunately, nuclear energy receives a bad reputation because disposal of its toxic wastes creates a difficult environmental problem. Wastes are put in airtight barrels and are buried in non-populated areas, but this could become a huge hazard on the environment if the wastes were ever to leak. However, there are model countries that generate most of their energy from nuclear power plants. France and Japan generate over seventy percent of their energy from nuclear power. Nuclear energy has evolved over the past few decades to the point where wastes can be recycled and reused – eliminating the toxic waste problem.
Other concerns with nuclear energy are over the risk of a melt down. This has happened in the past, and the Chernobyl incident in Russia was considered the worst nuclear power accident ever when one of its reactors had a melt down. The accident caused widespread radiation contamination over a large portion of Europe. The heat generated by reactors is very intense, and if the cooling is not sufficient, then the sealed nuclear fuel assemblies containing uranium or plutonium could create a melt down – consequently setting off a series of events leading to a nuclear disaster. However, today the technology is much more advanced and is much safer. Thus, the likelihood of a meltdown is diminished even further. The bottom line is that there are many checks and balances in place that make nuclear energy safer than ever before.
The problem in the United States is that nuclear power has such a bad reputation. As soon as someone mentions nuclear power, people immediately talk about all of its shortcomings, such as the problem at Three Mile Island and even about the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This is why we need professors to be responsible and teach both sides of an issue. The media also perpetuates the view that nuclear energy is bad. The end result is that Americans have been brainwashed to believe nuclear energy is bad because it is not safe.
My Blog: http://patrickbohan.blogtownhall.com/ (The Theory of Mediocrity)
My Book: Is America Dying? (Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble)