The "My View" column by Eileen McCabe-Olsen and Pete Litster (Feb. 8) accusing Mike Noel of being wrong about the safety of nuclear power generation is easily refuted by the facts in the literature. When one examines the current available means for generating electricity, nuclear power plants are not only clean and safe, they are also economic. This includes the extraction of the uranium ore all the way through decommissioning the plant and disposing of the waste.
The amendment to HB46 (made by Brad Daw and incorrectly attributed to me) was primarily about including nuclear power as a viable part of the energy policy of Utah, rather than the immediate construction of a nuclear power plant. The changing, volatile, global energy marketplace drives the need for re-evaluation and consideration of nuclear energy. Utah's dependence on coal-fired generation (94 percent of electricity in the state) suggests diversification may be prudent. Including nuclear plants in the energy portfolio of the power producers will reduce emissions/unit of power generated over the entire state-wide fleet.
In evaluating the potential for nuclear power generation in Utah the following issues and facts should be considered:
Safety: Since 1969, with more than 3,000 operational years of nuclear power generation in this country, neither a single U.S. worker nor a member of the U.S. public has ever died as a result of exposure to radiation due to a nuclear reactor incident. This includes the period encompassing the Three Mile Island nuclear accident the most serious U.S. nuclear accident ever. The "defense in depth" design philosophy common to U.S., European and Asian plants has led to the outstanding nuclear safety record of the industry.
Clean: Nuclear power generates far less greenhouse gas over its entire life cycle, including mining and enriching nuclear fuel, than any other currently available electricity source except wind power. Even solar power generates more greenhouse gases over its life cycle than does nuclear power.
Enrichment: Nuclear fuel enrichment is performed by private firms, not at "federal facilities" and does not require the use of fossil fuel plants. Enrichment could be performed using power from nuclear plants, thus reducing this component of greenhouse gas production.
- John Florez: Let's make education's Common...
- Kathleen Parker: Obnoxious attempt to...
- Letter: Lee's financial bungle reflects...
- Hatch's debating 'issue' is manufactured
- Letter: Utah newspapers need to cover both...
- Thomas Sowell: Raising taxes on rich won't...
- In our opinion: Editorial: A study on...
- Obama and Romney should speak truth on...
- Letter: Obama shows allegiance to the...
56 - Letter: Lee's financial bungle reflects...
37 - Letter: Obama throws a curveball
31 - Thomas Sowell: Raising taxes on rich...
26 - Letter: Age really matters regarding...
20 - Obama and Romney should speak truth on...
19 - Kathleen Parker: Obnoxious attempt to...
16 - Letter: Utah newspapers need to cover...
10






DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
— About comments