Nuclear Industry Pins Hopes on Subsidies

Around the world there are consultants, PR advisers and industry associations hyping nuclear power as a "solution" to global warming. However, they rarely mention the hidden costs. In a recent briefing for Wall Street analysts, the major U.S. trade association, the Nuclear Energy Institute, pointed to the need for government financial support such as loan guarantees to sustain the sector (PDF file). There are other subsidies, too. Paul Anthony, the CEO of the Australian electricity and gas retailer AGL Energy, pointed to two reasons why he thinks he'll never see nuclear power stations in his home country. "Nuclear power stations are uninsurable," he told Alan Kohler, the host of Inside Business, "so the insurer of last resort in all countries has to be the government." Nor, he said, has any country "effectively sorted out the long-term tail-end costs of holding redundant nuclear stations for the next 300 years."


I didn't realize that ANYONE thought nuclear power would fix global warming. We don't need some sort of industrial "fix" for pollution, we need real cultural change to where people would choose to use renewable energy over polluting energy all the time. For instance, solar panels installed on your roof can currently make you a decent amount of money but people don't install them because of the initial investment and, to my disgust, because they "look bad". When people stop caring about how bad their house that won't exist in 50 years because the environment destroys it we might have a real solution. More people buying into this idea means that they don't have to pay as much to do so and it becomes the better option all around.

I make music at
I offend people at