The Paua Palace

My royal blog, life, opinions and me, it’s all about ME.. Right?

Bush pushes Nuclear Power at APEC

Posted by pauaprincess on September 7, 2007

Is this just a lazy alternative for the USA to avoid actually contributing to working towards clean, sustainable, energy sources?  To make it appear they are doing something about the planet having walked away from Kyoto declaring it flawed but not doing anything to fix it?

Both Australia and the USA have abstained from ratifying the Kyoto Protocol citing economic hardship. On the eve of the APEC meeting in Sydney, New Zealand is going toe to toe with Australia and the USA over the subject, with the George Bush and his sycophant John Howard promoting a switch to Nuclear Power to cut green house emissions.  New Zealand is nuclear free and that isn’t going to change according to Winston Peters.  Phil Goff has stated that as a country New Zealand will be concentrating on clean and renewable resources for its power.

Is it just me or does it seem somewhat odd for a country (USA) that is actively prohibiting Iran from obtaining Nuclear Power Generation, accusing the Iranians of wanting to produce weapons, is now pushing Nuclear Power as the savior of the world.  Or is it just me that sees that as bizarre?  What are they going to do? Decide who can have power and who can’t?  Perhaps George W has shares in a Nuclear Power plant and he’s going to sell us all “the Power”?  Perhaps he just wants to learn how to say Nuclear?

Seriously though….

Global warming is caused by Green house gasses, namely Carbon Dioxide emissions.  Nuclear Power produces less CO2 and you can produce a much higher rate of energy from a single power plant, in the short term it would seem like a good solution.  However, what about the cons of Nuclear Power?

  • Radioactive waste, that needs to be carefully monitored for about 10,000 years.
  • The high risks of catastrophic accidents, were 3 mile Island and Chernobyl planned?
  • A higher risk of terrorist attack. Nuclear Power plants could become a preferred target of terrorists or the waste could be hijacked to create dirty bombs, more Nuclear Power plants world wide=greater risk.
  • Uranium is a scarce resource, with an estimated 30-60 years supply remaining in the world depending upon demand.

The very idea of producing a waste product, capable of threatening all life in the vicinity for 10 millennia  after it was used, doesn’t seem very clever to me.   In a speech in Athens Alabama on the 21st June 2007, George W Bush said

“Nuclear power is clean. It’s clean, domestic energy. There is a lot of discussion about the environment, as there should be. We certainly want to leave the environment better for the next generation that comes along. There’s a lot of discussion about greenhouse gases, which I believe is a serious problem.”

And now he’s at APEC pushing for Nuclear Power Generation.  I don’t know about the rest of you, but after nearly two terms in office filled with lies and threats, I view anything George W Bush says or supports, with a very suspicious gaze!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: