[Marxism] "Power to Save the World: The Truth About Nuclear Energy",

[David Walters]

Luis, just coffee, the cream increases the cholesterol. Liberals do 
that, which who respond on the dailykos. But I think I give them more 
heartburn than the other way around.

Bill, thanks for your more serious response. It is true in part what you 
accuse me of. I wouldn't be so focused on the technology if the other 
side wouldn't base their entire opposition to nuclear energy, sometimes, 
exclusively on: Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. It it's brought up, it 
has to be answered. Thus the "technocratic ideology" as mislabel my 
defense of the technology. I'm really just responding in kind.

The problem is that I focus in ideologues and emotional respondents like 
Harvey Wasserman and Helen Caldicott. I do so because yes, they are 
incredibly easy targets with their essentially emotional pitch, but also 
because they are well known and well publicized for their views. I 
should focus on people like Tam Hunt and others who are far more 
technically adept.

But on this list, that's who is linked to, its the 'commentators' that 
have no business defending their anti-nuclear point of view in public. 
So...here I am.

Another aspect of this whole debate is something I've tried (but believe 
have failed) to get people to focus on: the use of coal for generating 
electricity in countries like India, China and the US. Here we have a 
real and present environmental *disaster* and it gets mentioned only in 
passing. It kills and pollutes now yet barely a word about it by "The 
Movement". I just don't get it. NNadir does and excellent job, albeit 
somewhat overly emotive, in his focus on this. He can be read at 
nnadir.dailykos.com. He is definitely worth a read, especially the 
discussions that follow his posts. He at least understands the 
priorities, what the problems are with the continued use of fossil fuel. 
His answer, in large part, is similar to mine: more non-polluting 
nuclear vs billions of tons of carbon. He points out he is not talking 
about only CO2 and greenhouse gases. He's talking about the heavy-metal 
laden ash and soot that leads to respiratory problems in the hundreds of 
thousands. Stuff that effects us right now, now based on a "maybe 
scenerio" 5,000 years in the future.

David