Monday, January 25, 2010

The Anti Nuclear Conspiracy

I found this interesting quote at IntelliBriefs which claims it came from the January 22, 2010 issue of Executive Intelligence Review which is a Lyndon LaRouche property. So take it with a grain of salt. Or half a ton. But the pattern seems to fit.

What was promised by the Atoms for Peace process of U.S. Presidents Dwight D. Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy—access to the virtually unlimited power potential of nuclear energy, to escape from the colonial legacy of backwardness and poverty—was abruptly sabotaged in the 1970s. This was done under the cover of the anti-nuclear hysteria fostered by Prince Philip's environmentalist movement, and the fraudulent argument that non-proliferation of nuclear weapons required a halt to peaceful uses of nuclear power. Now, the nations of Asia have definitively rejected British imperial dictates, asserting their long-term development to be centered, necessarily, upon expanded nuclear power capacities.

Unfortunately, the West is still mired in the British Empire's muck. While Asian nations are currently engaged in the construction of 43 nuclear plants, the entire rest of the world is constructing only 12. The United States, once the unquestioned leader in nuclear power development, is now constructing but one facility—and that is simply the completion of a mothballed TVA plant, suspended in the 1980s. All of Western Europe is constructing only two plants, while Germany and Sweden have determined to phase out all their nuclear power plants—although the global economic collapse is forcing a reconsideration of that lunacy.

In the United States, 224 nuclear scientists, engineers, and others issued a public letter this week to President Obama's Science Advisor John Holdren, himself an anti-nuclear, anti-science zero-growther, warning that "the world is leaving us behind." The letter reads in part: "Our nation needs to proceed quickly—not twenty or fifty years from now—while the people who pioneered this science and engineering can still provide guidance to a new generation of scientists and engineers. There is no political, economic, or technical justification for delaying the benefits that nuclear power will bring to the United States, while the rest of the world forges ahead."
It does seem to me that nuclear can help bridge the gap over the next 50 or 100 years until we get workable fusion or renewables plus storage become economically viable. Of course there is always coal. The USA has lots of it.


Givin said...

yup, the next fix after spending 30 years pissing off and arming half the worlds population will be to put mostly undefensable nuclear power plants as close to as many major cities as possible.

Now that's homeland security.

M. Simon said...

This last cold spell was hard on the Brits. The wind didn't blow.

Fortunately they had coal and nuke plants so they didn't freeze.

They are wondering what they will do when North Sea gas runs out.


BTW you might find this of interest:

IEC Fusion Technology

and this:

We Will Know In Two Years


I'm going to assume you hang out at DU or KOS.

You might want to look up Roger Fox (he some times goes by Foger Rox there.


Josh Cryer On Polywell At DU. I'm told he has 11,000 posts at DU.

Josh and I fight about a LOT of things. We work together on Polywell.


Bussard's IEC Fusion Technology (Polywell Fusion) Explained