First of all, I know it "is not the time to attack nuclear power." Indeed, this is the defensive line that has become fashionable these days among the followers. Cool as far as the human capacity for delusion.
Last year I was informed, following a friendly argument with a great friend, advocate of nuclear power engineering as apparently many supporters of the 'atom savior. "
Before that genius, the most heard defense of said energy was "which is the cheapest and the only way to meet growing demand." In my opinion, acts of faith, because I've never been supported with figures, curiously having both engineer 'on board'.
a result, I found some links that seemed to say otherwise:
- That nuclear energy is not economically viable: http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/espana/reports / a-energy-to-no-future-desmon.pdf
- People
- Google saying that there is an alternative model of thorium-based nuclear power plants, more viable enonómicamente; but dismissed by the industry to produce plutonium worthlessness, that jewel of human self-destruction: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LeM-Dyuk6g . Look, for those who do not take the first: that only invest in nuclear power plants to make atomic bombs worth .
- Again Greenpeace arguing that Spain needed nuclear power plants: http://www.greenpeace.org/espana/news/091104-03/
- And today I found a brief but very effective explanation of how nuclear power plants exist only thanks to massive subsidies: http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2011/03/16/nuclear-powers-existence-dependent-on-multiple-forms-of-corporate-welfare/
By: Jon Walker Wednesday March 16, 2011 3:15 pmWhile there is rarely a large sector in our economy that doesn’t tend to get some form of corporate welfare, nuclear power is unique in that it benefits from almost every scheme ever designed by the government to directly or indirectly subsidize an industry.
Happy St. Patrick's Day!
0 comments:
Post a Comment