Ecology Law Currents is the online-only publication of Ecology Law Quarterly, one of the nation's most respected and widely read environmental law journals. Currents features short-form commentary and analysis on timely environmental law and policy issues.


To be notified when the latest Currents articles are published, subscribe to the Currents list serve by emailing here.


Ecology Law Currents accepts submissions on an ongoing basis. For more information, see our guidelines.

« Greenhouse Gas Emissions under CEQA Costs and Opportunities | Main | The Externalities of Nuclear Power:First, Assume We Have a Can Opener . . . »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

This green house global warming issue is still up for grabs. Especially after the exposure of the E-mails by the global warming experts who have been hard pressed to produce continued data to support global warming. I believe in nuclear power but doubt the existence of and danger of global warming. As for CO2 emissions, they only accelerate plant growth which takes it back out of the environment. This earth was designed by a wise God who is not alarmed by our use of fossil fuels. I go so far as to suggest that He put them there to be used wisely. What a blessing oil is to civilization; not to deny problems of safe extraction and management of it.

Want risk that is brought to bear in deaths? Try a middle-east war.

I think that this article, like most treatments of the energy problem, underestimates how dangerous it is to continue importing oil and natural gas. Between 1929-1945, the world suffered an enormous economic and political convulsion as global economic collapse produced widespread disaffection with ordinary civilized politics, and aggressive radicalism in Germany, Japan and Italy. If America defaults on its debt, if there prove to be limits on how much China can or will lend us, the world may undergo another such convulsion--this time with tens of thousands of nuclear weapons in existence. The dangers of nuclear energy should be weighed against THAT, a well as against gobal warming. Good luck with your support for nuclear energy; I'm usually pretty liberal, but I back you completely on this.

It's refreshing to finally see a legislator that acually understands the importance of nuclear power.

France is currently at 80% in the production of nuclear electricty and has a safety record which exceeds even NASA. We should be at 90% in nuclear electricity. If the atomic bomb can be developed in two years, then on-line nuclear power production can do the same. We need a Mahattan project to get nuclear electricity on-line quickly.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)