Nuclear power, and the lies the media wants us to believe

In an editorial published in today's Rochester (MN) Post Bulletin, op ed contributor Karl Grossman wrote about the dangers posed by nuclear energy. In response I submitted the following letter to the editor.

Sir - Mr. Grossman asserts that today's efforts to revive nuclear power are based on false premises. Unfortunately the premises he bases his argument on are themselves false. His first point is that building and operating nuclear power plants generates harmful greenhouse gases. He does not cite a source for his data, nor does he provide any indication of quantity. Would the quantity be more than, say, the amount of greenhouse gases generated by manufacturing, transporting, installing and maintaining an equivalent generation capacity in windfarms, for instance?

Secondly, referencing Chernobyl to support his assertion that nuclear power is inherently dangerous is nonsense that the popular media has used to mislead the public for long enough. For one thing modern reactor designs include passive safety features designed to shut down the reactor should things go wrong. More important, though, is the fact that the reactor at Chernobyl was housed in what amounts to a backyard polebarn, with no containment building at all. All the existing reactors in the US are housed in massive steel-reinforced concrete containment buildings, many of which are designed to withstand a direct impact from a jumbo jet. Had the Chernobyl reactor been built to the US standards in place at the time the loss of life would have been limited to those inside the plant (possibly none), and the subsequent radiation release would likely have been eliminated.

Mr. Grossman and much of the print media seem to be disinterested in reporting this factoid when referencing Chernobyl. Isn't about time the whole story was told?

regards,