Great article by John Tierney in The New York Times contrasting the ‘soft’ Barack Obama vs ‘hard’ John McCain approaches to America’s energy future yesterday. The soft path includes “energy conservation and power from the sun, wind and plants” while the hard path is more “about building nuclear power plants.” Tierney does a great job making the case for the hard approach over the soft approach, so read the whole thing, but his conclusion is the best part of the piece: By scaring people about the tiny levels of radiation …
Unintended consequences of the federal government’s energy policy are nothing new. Think about ethanol. The United States is now committed to using 9 billion gallons of ethanol in 2008, which will rise to 36 billion by 2022. No one thought it would be responsible for pushing 30 million people into poverty. No one thought of the adverse effects ethanol policy would have on the environment. Now, Americans are quite literally feeling the unintended consequences of wind energy. While wind is often touted as a green, renewable source of energy, Dr. …
The economy is by far the No. 1 issue on most Americans’ minds. Gas prices are a close second. The two issues are intimately related. But the spike in oil prices this year is just the tip of the iceberg. Due to similar developments in supply and demand, electricity prices are set to skyrocket next year. While American oil consumption has grown only 15% since 1973, electricity use has shot up 115%. Right now the U.S. has 760 gigawatts of power to meet consumption. We will need 135 gigawatts of …
The Heritage Foundation is no big fan of central planning or government subsidies. So while we commend John McCain for recognizing that nuclear energy ought to have a role in U.S. energy policy, we do not believe the federal government should be setting arbitrary targets like 45 or 100 nuclear power plants in X number of years. Instead the government should focus on providing the adequate oversight and sound regulatory environment for the private nuclear market to flourish. That said, the numbers that McCain did throw out, are a good …
The U.S. Department of Energy officially submitted the license application to build a nuclear waste facility at Yucca Mountain in Nevada earlier this week. A strong supporter of the Lieberman-Warner carbon-capping bill, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) was incredulous, telling reporters: “Yucca Mountain is as close to being dead as any piece of legislation could be.” However, Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and John Warner (R-Va.) both recognize that their bill will not pass without more nuclear power. Far to Warner and Lieberman’s left though, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) thinks their …
Finland, like the United States, is facing both rapidly growing energy demands and a need to reduce their country’s carbon emissions. Unlike the U.S., Finland is being honest about the cost and benefits of currently available solutions and is about to finish their first nuclear power plant since 1980. Heritage analyst Jack Spencer details how the Finns were able to succeed where the U.S. has failed and concludes: Although burdened by high up-front capital costs, financial risk, and difficult politics, Finland recognizes the positive long-term impact of nuclear power. Not …
