The comparison of nuclear power to any other energy source currently utilized in the United States is a case of apples and oranges. NO OTHER energy source has close to the need for high-level security over waste storage, nor nearly the length of time required to render that waste non-toxic. Is there another energy source that produces waste that gets MORE volatile and less stable over time?
I have not seen a single comparison of options for America’s energy solution that includes these integral costs.
But that is just the financial logic.
Far more insidious and far greater justification for why nuclear power is not a viable solution is the ongoing effects of the Chernobyl nuclear accident.
I beg you, especially if you believe that nuclear power should be part of our energy equation, to take a few minutes and view a short slideshow of the work of photographer Paul Fusco, who visited Chernobyl and the surrounding region in 2006, twenty years after the nuclear accident:
There is no other argument necessary. View these images and then tell me you are willing to risk this fate for your grandchildren and their grandchildren. How could you?