|
|
|
|
I am disappointed with your editorial that appeared in Sunday’s Victoria Advocate. I really need some clarification. You state, and I quote, “While global demand increases, worldwide energy supply remains fairly stagnant, unnecessarily restrained by government regulations and prohibitions.” What do you mean by energy supply? Do you mean oil, electricity or both? What are the unnecessary government regulations concerning nuclear energy? Are you suggesting we do away with the NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission)? Your editorial is entitled “ Texas poised to lead American nuclear renaissance.” You never mention nuclear waste. Are you suggesting as good Americans that we build the proposed nuclear waste facility in Texas? Who should pay for the nuclear waste facility and its maintenance? I share your concern for our energy needs! The following are just a few of my thoughts and concerns — clean, cheap, safe energy?
I am writing to express my concerns regarding the energy crisis facing our great country. Everyone, myself included, is concerned with the price of gas and on our dependency on foreign oil and global warming. What we want is clean, cheap, safe energy.
People propose that nuclear energy is clean energy, that it leaves no carbon footprint. It does not produce carbon dioxide. This is true. However, it does leave a footprint. It leaves a radioactive footprint that will last at least 10,000 years. What do we do with the radioactive waste? As of now, there is no solution other that to store it at the facilities where it is generated. We are running out of room. A facility has been proposed — the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Facility in Nevada. The latest estimate to build the facility is about $100 billion. That is the cost to build it, not maintain it. That is about a billion dollars for every nuclear power plant in our great country. But does Nevada want the facility in their state? No! Do Texans want it? No! Do people in Victoria or Refugio or Jackson or Goliad counties want it? No! No one wants it! Who will pay for the waste facility and who will maintain it? As of now, Congress is proposing that the taxpayers pay for the facility, not the nuclear industry. So we will pay for their electricity and their waste. Wish somebody would pay my garbage bill! The nuclear industry should pay for the facility and the maintenance (10,000 years).
Maybe nuclear energy isn’t so cheap. Would we be building more nuclear plants if the nuclear industry had to pay for the disposal and maintenance of their waste? Then there is the notion of “safe.” So we have the NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission). Is there a WRC (Wind Regulatory Commission) or a Solar Regulatory Commission? Is the NRC like the DPS, it will prevent accidents? Hello! One definition of “safe” is — protected from danger or risk. Nuclear material is dangerous, otherwise we wouldn’t have to a have regulatory commission, the NRC. So I ask you is nuclear energy really clean, cheap, safe energy?
People exclaim, “But we have to do something about the energy crisis!” Yes, let’s develop renewable energy. Exelon, develop a solar or wind plant, and you will not drive the wedge you are building between the citizens in Victoria County, and you will not contribute further to an ever-growing 10,000-year radioactive footprint. There has not been a nuclear license granted in the United States by the NRC since 1984. Why? Because of the fear of a nuclear accident — Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. Those memories have faded. Now we have the fear of high energy prices and fear that we will have to change the way we live. The nuclear industry is now trying to play on our present fears and fast track new nuclear facilities. Let the people of Victoria County vote on if we need a nuclear power plant.
Mark Loffgren is a resident of
Victoria.