Facts essential in environmental debate

Dear Editor,

Sydnie Lieb’s Oct. 29 Op-Ed (“Vote Red to Go Green”) showcased political bias, incoherent reasoning and a substandard grasp on the facts of energy generation.

The author states that because solar power generation uses substantial amounts of space, “It is impossible that Senator Obama has any chance of solving the energy crisis.” Apart from the ludicrous degree of certainty claimed, the facts do not bear this out: Most estimates indicate that a roughly 100 square miles of solar panels in the American Southwest would power our country’s entire electricity usage. Apparently, the author did not check her facts before stating “we require significantly more energy than they [solar and wind energy] can harness.”

Additionally, she claimed that “the truth about nuclear waste is that in many cases, there is none,” apparently alluding to waste reprocessing. All nuclear power plants generate spent fuel. The spent fuel rods that are reprocessed are still estimated to be dangerously radioactive for at least 300 years. Moreover, in all cases some amount of spent fuel cannot be reprocessed; as a result, our country currently has over 50,000 metric tons of high-level radioactive waste that will pose a health threat for the next 10,000 years, according to the EPA.

I do not argue that nuclear power is bad, or that solar and wind power are our only energy solutions. I only assert that spreading inaccuracies about these important issues is irresponsible and dangerous. Getting the facts right about energy is crucial; our future as a planet depends on it.

Joey Stromberg
Class of 2010

Comments

Be the first to comment on this article!

Add comment


I am not posting spam. I understand posting spam or other comments that are unrelated to this article will cause my comment to be flagged for deletion and possibly cause my IP address to be permanently banned from this server.

Verify you are human:

Enter the characters in the image above: