Going Nuclear: "In the early 1970s when I helped found Greenpeace, I believed that nuclear energy was synonymous with nuclear holocaust, as did most of my compatriots. That's the conviction that inspired Greenpeace's first voyage up the spectacular rocky northwest coast to protest the testing of U.S. hydrogen bombs in Alaska's Aleutian Islands. Thirty years on, my views have changed, and the rest of the environmental movement needs to update its views, too, because nuclear energy may just be the energy source that can save our planet from another possible disaster: catastrophic climate change.
Look at it this way: More than 600 coal-fired electric plants in the United States produce 36 percent of U.S. emissions -- or nearly 10 percent of global emissions -- of CO2, the primary greenhouse gas responsible for climate change. Nuclear energy is the only large-scale, cost-effective energy source that can reduce these emissions while continuing to satisfy a growing demand for power. And these days it can do so safely.

In The Post's Outlook Section
Lebanon, My Lebanon
Going Nuclear
Going Nuclear: The Pentagon Preps for Iran
The Prayer Breakfast Presidency
HUMAN NATURE: The (Crisco) Oil Crisis
More From Outlook

The Generals' Revolt
� Editorial Donald Rumsfeld should have left long ago. But finger-pointing by retired officers shouldn't be the reason why.
Broder: Listen to the Brass
Marcus: First Family Shakeup
Cohen: A Campaign Gore Can't Lose
OPINIONS SECTION: Toles, Editorials

Who's Blogging?
Read what bloggers are saying about this article.
argitaratutako azkenak // zabaldu.com
The Cranky Insomniac
Calico Cat


Full List of Blogs (266 links) �


Most Blog"