AccessMyLibrary provides FREE access to over 30 million articles from top publications available through your library.
Create a link to this page
Copy and paste this link tag into your Web page or blog:
Dear Editor:
While I'm impressed that my short letter regarding nuclear power (September 2004) inspired three responses (November 2004), two substantially longer than my own, I'm amused at the lack of substance in those responses.
I tried to make three simple points in my letter:
1. your headline about a debate about nuclear energy in the July issue didn't reflect the contents of the article
2. nuclear energy has received a lot of public subsidy over the years
3. given its less than stellar track record in regard to both safety and economic performance, it doesn't deserve further public subsidy.
Nowhere did I say that further R&D or further investment shouldn't take place. It just seems obvious to me, given the facts, that it doesn't deserve any more public subsidization. I didn't refer to it in my letter, but I also don't think it deserves relaxed safety standards or review processes. I'm all for speedier review processes. But I don't think safety should be compromised to achieve greater speed.