Skip to main content

View Diary: A Calculation: How Many Trillions of Dollars of Environmental Damage Will IGCC Coal Cost? (48 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Some energies are net negative subsidized (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NNadir

    because government gets much more from them in special consumption taxes than it gives back to the suppliers in the form of subsidies. Nuclear would not be one of these, but petroleum and natural gas are.

    A gas pipeline blast here, a tanker crash there, and still another place a houseful of children poisoned by hydrocarbon waste, and as long as one doesn't know any of the victims, it's easy to speak as if one did not believe nuclear to be much safer and cleaner; a government paycheque may be helpful in saying this, and in calling for renewable energy, secure in the knowledge that as yet it's no threat to anyone's petrodollar income.

    Two happy facts about "Edwin" Teller, or anyway, two facts that I think NNadir will be happy to learn: (1) his anglicized name was actually Edward. In his native country he was Ede.

    (2) he had at least as significant a role as Alvin Weinberg in ensuring no country outside the former Soviet Union ever risked a Chernobyl. Weinberg may have helped ensured the dome would be there to contain it, but Teller made sure there would never be one to contain.

    Although remembered as the "father of the hydrogen bomb", that's not a unique distinction. He really should be remembered as Chernobyl preventer.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site