Until mid-March, Obama, the big environmental groups and many Republicans and Democrats in Congress agreed on one thing, even if they opposed on almost all other aspects of policy Energy: nuclear energy was a source of constant energy and was one of the solutions to global warming. The nuclear industry, as it paralyzed the United States since the accident at the Three Mile Island in 1979, was preparing to make a comeback.
Today, everything is questioned as the world following the crisis in the Japanese reactors and the fear they generate is spreading. "I believe that here in the U.S., this should motivate us not to stop the construction of nuclear plants, but at least put a brake for now, until we understand the ramifications of what s is spent in Japan, "said Joseph Lieberman, Independent senator from Connecticut and a leading member of the Senate on energy issues.
Environmental groups no longer appear so ready to consider nuclear power as a pillar of any new legislation on climate change. Obama continues to see the atom as a key element of energy policy in America, but did show greater caution in expressing their support. "The president thinks that, to meet our energy needs, we must rely on diverse sources, including renewable energy like wind and solar, but also natural gas, clean coal and nuclear power," said Clark Stevens, spokesman for the White House.
"We follow closely the developments in Japan and the Government undertakes to learn in order to ensure that nuclear energy is produced safely and responsibly here in the United States." In political terms, the implications are frustrating for the United States. "It is impossible to respond to climate change using current technologies without the benefit clearly on nuclear," said Jason Grumet, president of the Bipartisan Policy Center, a think tank in Washington, and Obama adviser in 2008 on energy issues and climate change.
"It is too early to draw conclusions from what happened in Japan and to see how this could apply to the United States. But the safety of nuclear power will undoubtedly reach the top of the list of questions in the coming months. "Obama, like its predecessors, the Atomic Energy argued when he tried to converse with a political strategy and technology to ensure energy supply while reducing the emission of greenhouse gas emissions.
Edward Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts, has always been wary of nuclear power, although he supported the expansion of the sector as part of the bill on energy and climate he helped introduce to the House. He said the United States today needs stricter regulations on the installation and commissioning of nuclear power plants.
It states that authorities should consider a moratorium on the installation of plants in earthquake zones, require the construction of containment more resistant in areas prone to earthquakes and sift through the 31 stations that, in the U.S. States, use the same technology as the Japanese reactors damaged.
According to him, "the disaster we are seeing in Japan is causing a revolution in thinking in how we conceive of nuclear security here in America." 
Today, everything is questioned as the world following the crisis in the Japanese reactors and the fear they generate is spreading. "I believe that here in the U.S., this should motivate us not to stop the construction of nuclear plants, but at least put a brake for now, until we understand the ramifications of what s is spent in Japan, "said Joseph Lieberman, Independent senator from Connecticut and a leading member of the Senate on energy issues.
Environmental groups no longer appear so ready to consider nuclear power as a pillar of any new legislation on climate change. Obama continues to see the atom as a key element of energy policy in America, but did show greater caution in expressing their support. "The president thinks that, to meet our energy needs, we must rely on diverse sources, including renewable energy like wind and solar, but also natural gas, clean coal and nuclear power," said Clark Stevens, spokesman for the White House.
"We follow closely the developments in Japan and the Government undertakes to learn in order to ensure that nuclear energy is produced safely and responsibly here in the United States." In political terms, the implications are frustrating for the United States. "It is impossible to respond to climate change using current technologies without the benefit clearly on nuclear," said Jason Grumet, president of the Bipartisan Policy Center, a think tank in Washington, and Obama adviser in 2008 on energy issues and climate change.
"It is too early to draw conclusions from what happened in Japan and to see how this could apply to the United States. But the safety of nuclear power will undoubtedly reach the top of the list of questions in the coming months. "Obama, like its predecessors, the Atomic Energy argued when he tried to converse with a political strategy and technology to ensure energy supply while reducing the emission of greenhouse gas emissions.
Edward Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts, has always been wary of nuclear power, although he supported the expansion of the sector as part of the bill on energy and climate he helped introduce to the House. He said the United States today needs stricter regulations on the installation and commissioning of nuclear power plants.
It states that authorities should consider a moratorium on the installation of plants in earthquake zones, require the construction of containment more resistant in areas prone to earthquakes and sift through the 31 stations that, in the U.S. States, use the same technology as the Japanese reactors damaged.
According to him, "the disaster we are seeing in Japan is causing a revolution in thinking in how we conceive of nuclear security here in America."
- Obama's Coup D'état (via Be Sure You're RIGHT, Then Go Ahead) (04/01/2011)
- "Au Revoir Color-coded Terror Chart" and related posts (27/01/2011)
- Au Revoir Color-coded Terror Chart - New York Magazine (27/01/2011)
- First Japanese radioactive particles reach U.S. West Coast but UN officials claim they're a 'billion times' beneath danger levels (18/03/2011)
- Au Revoir (11/03/2011)
No comments:
Post a Comment