Nuclear Power Madness: ...Absurd Or Pathetic -- If The Consequences Weren't So Grave
22 March 2011By
Norman Solomon
Like
every other president since the 1940s, Barack Obama
has promoted nuclear power. Now, with reactors melting
down in Japan, the official stance is more
disconnected from reality than ever.
Political elites are still clinging to the oxymoron of
"safe nuclear power." It's up to us -- people around
the world -- to peacefully and insistently shut those
plants down.
There is no more techno-advanced country in the world
than Japan. Nuclear power is not safe there, and it is
not safe anywhere.
As the New York Times reported on Monday, "most of the
nuclear plants in the United States share some or all
of the risk factors that played a role at Fukushima
Daiichi: locations on tsunami-prone coastlines or near
earthquake faults, aging plants and backup electrical
systems that rely on diesel generators and batteries
that could fail in extreme circumstances."
Nuclear power -- from uranium mining to fuel
fabrication to reactor operations to nuclear waste
that will remain deadly for hundreds of thousands of
years -- is, in fact, a moral crime against future
generations.
But syrupy rhetoric has always marinated the nuclear
age. From the outset -- even as radioactive ashes were
still hot in Hiroshima and Nagasaki -- top officials
in Washington touted atomic energy as redemptive. The
split atom, we were to believe, could be an elevating
marvel.
President Dwight Eisenhower pledged "to help solve the
fearful atomic dilemma" by showing that "the
miraculous inventiveness of man shall not be dedicated
to his death, but consecrated to his life."
Even after the Three Mile Island accident in 1979 and
the Chernobyl disaster in 1986 -- and now this
catastrophe in Japan -- the corporate theologians of
nuclear faith have continued to bless their own divine
projects.
Thirty years ago, when I coordinated the National
Citizens Hearings for Radiation Victims on the edge of
Capitol Hill, we heard grim testimony from nuclear
scientists, workers, downwinders and many others whose
lives had been forever ravaged by the split atom.
Routine in the process was tag-team deception from
government agencies and nuclear-invested companies.
By 1980, generations had already suffered a vast array
of terrible consequences -- including cancer, leukemia
and genetic injuries -- from a nuclear fuel cycle
shared by the "peaceful" and military atom. Today, we
know a lot more about the abrupt and slow-moving
horrors of the nuclear industry.
And we keep learning, by the minute, as nuclear
catastrophe goes exponential in Japan. But government
leaders don't seem to be learning much of anything.
On Sunday, even while nuclear-power reactors were
melting down, the White House issued this statement:
"The president believes that meeting our energy needs
means relying on a diverse set of energy sources that
includes renewables like wind and solar, natural gas,
clean coal and nuclear power. Information is still
coming in about the events unfolding in Japan, but the
administration is committed to learning from them and
ensuring that nuclear energy is produced safely and
responsibly here in the U.S."
Yet another reflexive nuclear salute.
When this year's State of the Union address proclaimed
a goal of "clean energy sources" for 80 percent of
U.S. electricity by 2035, Obama added: "Some folks
want wind and solar. Others want nuclear, clean coal
and natural gas. To meet this goal, we will need them
all -- and I urge Democrats and Republicans to work
together to make it happen."
Bipartisan for nuclear power? You betcha. On Sunday
morning TV shows, Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell
voiced support for nuclear power, while Democratic
Sen. Chuck Schumer offered this convoluted ode to
atomic flackery: "We are going to have to see what
happens here -- obviously still things are happening
-- but the bottom line is we do have to free ourselves
of independence from foreign oil in the other half of
the globe. Libya showed that. Prices are up, our
economy is being hurt by it, or could be hurt by it.
So I'm still willing to look at nuclear. As I've
always said it has to be done safely and carefully."
Such behavior might just seem absurd or pathetic -- if
the consequences weren't so grave.
Nuclear power madness is so entrenched that mainline
pundits and top elected officials rarely murmur
dissent. Acquiescence is equated with prudent
sagacity.
In early 2010, President Obama announced federal loan
guarantees -- totaling more than $8 billion -- to
revive the construction of nuclear power plants in
this country, where 110 nuclear-power reactors are
already in operation.
"Investing in nuclear energy remains a necessary
step," he said. "What I hope is that, with this
announcement, we're underscoring both our seriousness
in meeting the energy challenge and our willingness to
look at this challenge, not as a partisan issue, but
as a matter that's far more important than politics
because the choices we make will affect not just the
next generation but many generations to come."
Promising to push for bigger loan guarantees to build
more nuclear power plants, the president said: "This
is only the beginning."
Norman Solomon is president of the Institute for
Public Accuracy and a senior fellow at RootsAction.
His books include "Killing Our Own: The Disaster of
America's Experience with Atomic Radiation" (1982),
co-authored with Harvey Wasserman.
©
EsinIslam.Com
Add Comments