This article surveys our energy problems and the global food and starvation crisis caused to a major extent by the biofuel fiasco. The solution the article lifts up is nuclear energy! It does not pollute the air like other fuels. It is pretty much inexhaustible. And yet, people fear it irrationally. A nuclear power plant does NOT set off an atom bomb. It’s not like on the Simpsons, generating three eyed fish and irradiating the community. The radiation can be managed pretty easily.
Do you buy that argument, that environmentalists, in blocking the building of new nuclear energy plants, are harming the environment?
Or can another case be made against nuclear energy, that it violates the basic building block of matter in a profoundly unnatural and so immoral way?
At any rate, when the left ridicules President Bush, pro-lifers, creationists, and social conservatives in general for being “anti-science”–whether their stances are valid or not– can we include anti-nuclear activists in that group?
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In