We have a climate disaster on our hands, caused by emitting carbon into the atmosphere. You would think that we would be in favor of replacing energy from carbon with carbon-free energy. Nope. Instead, nuclear illiteracy has prevented a realistic approach to energy production for decades.
Consider this: An average nuclear plant requires 27 tons of fuel per year. An equivalent coal plant requires 1.5 million tons of fuel per year. If we’d replaced one coal plant per year since 1980 (less than one per state), we would have reduced coal consumption by 57 million tons per year in 2018, with a cumulative savings of 1.1 billion tons.
How about ships? A medium-sized container ship burns 140 tons of carbon fuel per day; a nuclear-powered Navy vessel, none.
Unless we wake up immediately and promote building and improving nuclear power, we will suffer the consequences. Of course, wind, solar, tidal, hydro and geothermal energy must also be developed aggressively, but not in place of the real power available with nuclear energy.
Had we begun in 1980, we might be there now. We’d also be decades ahead on nuclear technology, electric vehicles and other electric alternatives. It is not too late yet, but it may be soon.
George Lawson
Gorham
Send questions/comments to the editors.
Success. Please wait for the page to reload. If the page does not reload within 5 seconds, please refresh the page.
Enter your email and password to access comments.
Hi, to comment on stories you must . This profile is in addition to your subscription and website login.
Already have a commenting profile? .
Invalid username/password.
Please check your email to confirm and complete your registration.
Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or login first for digital access. Here’s why.
Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.