Letters: Jan. 25 — Nuclear power not the answer

In this mention

Kristina Shands of the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy responds to a guest column advocating nuclear power, arguing that nuclear energy has failed to deliver on its promises and that clean air can be achieved through energy efficiency and renewable energy instead. The letter cites Congressional Research Service data showing that 59% of U.S. energy research funding from 1948–1998 went to nuclear power despite it providing only 20% of total energy generation.

Original clipping

PDF didn't open? Open it in a new tab →

Letters: Jan. 25

Nuclear power not the answer Regarding the Jan. 5 guest column by Lee Martin discussing nuclear power's role in the future, "U.S. needs nuclear power," history has proven that nuclear power is not the solution to America's energy needs.

The nuclear power industry has already failed in its promise of energy that would be "too cheap to matter."

If nuclear power is so economical, why has it required so much in federal subsidies for so long?.

According to the Congressional Research Service, the United States spent more than $111 billion on energy research and development from 1948 to 1998. Sixty-six billion dollars, or 59 percent of that total, were spent on nuclear power — an industry that provides a disproportionate 20 percent of total energy generation to the country.

The author asked, "Is clean air more important than extreme fears?" Clean air is needed but not at the expense of our safety and security. We can accomplish clean-air protections by supporting energy efficiency and conservation programs and promoting safe, clean renewable energy supplies. Nuclear power already derailed its own future — there's no need to bail it out again.

KRISTINA SHANDS Southern Alliance for Clean Energy Knoxville