Eight Forty-Eight - The Future of Nuclear

7:00pm		The World

8:00pm		Eight Forty-Eight

		View Schedule

There are many ways to support public radio.

Submit

Events

2.9.2010	Sweet Home Chicago Seminar: Classic Candy
2.9.2010	Bookstore Owners Talk Business
View full calendar

Submit

Eight Forty-Eight Monday through Thursday at 9am and 8pm; Friday at 9am

About | Contributors | Archive | Series | Contact

The Future of Nuclear

President George W. Bush’s environmental policies began to take shape under his first EPA administrator, Christine Todd Whitman. She was a notably moderate voice in a largely conservative cabinet, and she tussled with the White House now and then before departing in 2003.

On the other hand, environmentalists say she dutifully followed Bush’s agenda in key areas – from climate change to Manhattan’s air quality after 911. Now, she’s at the forefront of a push to invest in nuclear power.

Whitman's the co-chair of the nuclear-industry-funded Clean and Safe Energy Coalition. We caught up with her in Chicago yesterday, and asked her to address some lingering controversies about nuclear power’s safety, like the release of low-level radiation that can build up in the environment.

Music Button: Shane Newville, “Apartment Break 3000” from the CD Formless (Syntax records)

Paul Gunter, Washington, DC // Tuesday, February 19, 2008 @ 2:46 PM

Ms. Todd-Whitman says that there is no evidence of an increased incidence of cancer around nuclear power stations. In fact, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health did publish a peer reviewed study in October 1990 that found a 400% increase in a rare adult leukemia that was associated with the duration and proximity of residency to the Pilgrim nuclear power station in Plymouth, Mass. Contrary to Ms Todd-Whitman's assertion, the tritium leaks from the Braidwood nuclear power station were not "contained." Two of the radioactive leaks in 1998 and 2000 were more than 3 million gallons each and flowed offsite into the public right of way and into nearby residents' yards and ponds. The radioactivity has soaked into the groundwater table. Her blanket assertion that there was no immediate health consequence is baseless and irrelevant. The fact is, these were unplanned, unmonitored, and unreported radioactive releases of tritiated water. There is no safe level of exposure to tritium, an isotopic form of hydrogen. The clinical evidence shows that there is no safe threshold dose, particularly for the most vulnerable of neighboring populations, pregant women.

Rod Adams, Annapolis Maryland // Friday, February 22, 2008 @ 8:18 AM

Mr. Gunter is a professional anti-nuclear activist who likes to pick and choose the studies that he quotes. There are few environmental influences that have been more studied than low levels of radiation. The overwhelming evidence is that any health effects are near zero (perhaps even on the beneficial side of zero) for all doses that come from routine nuclear plant operations. The rate of exposure even at the plant boundary is far less than 1% of the average background rate of exposure. Gunter quotes a big, scary number of gallons of tritiated water, but he fails to mention just how diluted the tritium was in that water or how low the risk actually was. While I agree with Ms. Whitman that transparency is needed, I want everyone to think about just how much information they get about routine emissions of all of the deadly pollution that comes out of coal fired power plant stacks whenever they are running. What Gunter never wants to admit is that the choices for reliable electricity production sources are limited to coal, natural gas or nuclear power. Those three sources combine to produce about 90% of the electricity in the US. Wind and solar together represent well under 1% of the US electricity production each year. Here are the production costs of electricity from the three major sources as of 2006: (the 2007 numbers are not yet available but both gas and coal have increased considerably) Nuclear: 1.72 cents per kilowatt-hour Coal: 2.37 cents per kilowatt-hour Gas: 6.75 cents per kilowatt-hour As a former submarine engineer officer, I know how clean and reliable nuclear plants can be. I have also been working for a number of years to develop a simpler design that can be produced in series. My company believes that is the way to attack the capital cost disadvantage head on instead of wringing our hands about how expensive the plants can be. Like many people, I am concerned about the world that I leave my children, grandchildren and all other subsequent generations. I am certain that they will thank me for the legacy of nuclear knowledge but would be very uncomfortable living in a world where all of the fossil fuels had been thrown up into the air in the form of pollution so we could power our computers, lights and dishwashers.