I'm following The American Power Act, Kerry-Lieberman, May 2010. My concerned
reactions to the proposals in TITLE I, Subtitle A follow:
(1) I understand how fervently most of us Americans want to cut ourselves loose
from MiddleEast Energy Dependence, as the political realities of that area are uncertain,
to employ kind euphemisms;
(2) But Nuclear Power is NOT clean, safe, financially sound, or even strictly "local"
(confined to our U.S. borders);
(3) The entire issue is one of Physics, Geology, Geography, Reactor Technology, Storage Cask
Technology/Reliability, Proprietary Business Interests, Power and Politics....fiendishly
difficult to understand even by the finest minds without years of intensive study.
(4) I often feel that few in the U.S. Senate (or House) at any time have deeply studied
the exigencies inherent in pusuing this technology; former President Carter, having been
a Navy Nuclear Engineer, is the only top official I can recall with such expertise.
Please do not support TITLE I Subtitle A of The American Power Act when it comes
to the floor; the old arguments from the '60's and '70's still have factual relevancy, sadly.
Radwaste is still toxic after 250,000 years, and reprocessing does NOT mitigate the danger.
Concerned Americans should call, fax, wire, email or snail mail their national house and senate reps.
The consequences of inaction or apathy are long lasting and great.