Nuclear Energy Fears Disappear After BP Oil Disaster

Early this year, President Obama caught a lot of flack from the environmentally minded left for voicing strong support for nuclear energy. Slowly, due to widespread criticism and repeated safety fiascoes at nuclear plants nationwide, nuclear's credibility slowly became radioactive. Before long, nuclear distaste caught on.

These fears culminated when Rep. Edward Markey, the Democrat in charge of the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment asked the Government Accountability Office to review US policy promoting government-backed nuclear reactors. He wrote in March that while the dangers of climate change are important, "a catastrophic accident at a nuclear plant would pose a threat to the public health and safety many orders of magnitude more severe than at any other type of power plant."

But this month's oil spill disaster off the Gulf Coast has mostly brushed aside the worries that nuclear is dangerous and dirty. Instead of the event serving as a lesson that our antiquated sources of energy should be phased out in favor of renewable energy, it has made oil the sole scapegoat of dirty energy production, and threatens to let all others off the hook.

Energy expert John Horgan, for example, blogged at Scientific American Tuesday that "nuclear power isn't so bad after all." Horgan, who has blogged his opposition to nuclear energy and expressed his concerns on bloggingheads.tv, says his view reversed after speaking with Rod Adams, a Navy officer who served on nuclear submarines.

Explaining the switcheroo, Horgan provides an illogical list of nuclear's potential achievements. He writes that nuclear power can help decrease -- not spread -- WMD, nuclear waste should be considered a benefit -- not drawback -- of reactors, and that reactors are not prone to terrorist attacks.

Horgan best point is that "nuclear energy is cheaper and cleaner than fossil fuels." While that's true, it doesn't go far enough. I'm continually frustrated that the US energy industry is forced to make the false choice between a set of dirty, dangerous options rather than putting substantial resources toward making clean renewables more ubiquitous.

Unfortunately, Horton's post is indicative of the larger sway of public opinion when it comes to nuclear energy as a "renewable" resource. And the unfortunate reality is that even if Congress manages to pass stricter safety regulations for offshore drilling, their short attention span could cause other safety villains -- dirty nuclear chief among them -- to fall through the cracks.

Photo credit: Andreas Rueda