Within the BarackObama.com website there are many different user groups with a variety of interests. These groups have email listservs that have seen many heated debates among the members behind the scenes. It should be no surprise that there are pro-nuclear groups, anti-nuclear groups, and renewable advocacy groups where members intermix and often exchange more than just ideas. I have archived a collection of many of these group emails that could make for some good posting fodder someday, but for now I hope to just burst one bubble.
Sheldon Motley, an at-large delegate from Pennsylvania, is particularly active in these groups spreading the typical tow-the-line anti-nuclear propaganda through the listservs. The anti-nuclear content Sheldon likes to peddle is nothing new, they live on like urban legends. As soon as there is a new institutional anti-nuclear paper such as the Vermont Law document recently published, Sheldon latches onto it as gospel. Charles Barton has written about the Vermont Law "study" paper and raises some excellent counter points. Worse yet, these anti-nuclear activists give no acknowledgment of nuclear energy's past contribution toward a cleaner climate or the guaranteed impossibility of a cleaner climate without nuclear. It might be another matter if you read a conciliatory statement such as "if only nuclear energy could overcome our concerns, it would be a great asset because the road ahead without it will be extremely arduous if not impossible". But no, there is not even so much as a shred of respect for nuclear energy among the crowd of Sheldon Motley's. They are determined to make nuclear energy the Rodney Dangerfield of energy sources.
Not only can nuclear energy overcome the concerns of the anti-nuke crowd, for the most part, it already has. The answers to prove this don't come from some small band of pro-nuclear conspiracy groups touting contrived studies as they do from the anti-nuclear groups. The answers come from scientists, our national labs, energy statistics, and esteemed universities that have dispelled these concerns repeatedly. Despite all the credible sources that endorse nuclear energy, these anti-nuke groups continue to thrive on second-hand ignorance group beliefs and most importantly - contributions.
Sheldon recently forwarded an anti-nuclear campaign letter from Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS), a prominent anti-nuclear organization, that urges nuclear be kept out of the Senate Climate bill. Given what has been mentioned so far about nuclear in the Markey-Waxman bill, it seems they have little to be concerned about, nonetheless they are diligent and organized. A week or two previous to this, Sheldon forwarded material from "Beyond Nuclear", yet another anti-nuclear activist group.
I find arguing against anti-nuclear activism quite tiresome actually. I'd rather be writing about nuclear advancements, new supporters and new reactors that show great promise. The facts are easily researchable now and more people are waking up to the fact that we must get very serious about nuclear development as we are many years behind now. People are realizing that wind and solar will amount to basically nothing but a waste of money. I fear President Obama has already placed too much stake in this "soft energy path" philosophy and it could end up hurting his presidency. For this reason and the benefit of the President and others, the types of anti-nukes that claim to know what they are talking about must be exposed.
Sheldon does nothing more than regurgitate the writings of Amory Lovins, Helen Caldicott and others so there is nothing that he has said that is worthy of refuting. Lovins and Caldicott have already been taken to task thoroughly in many nuclear blogs. I am not one to criticize a person's ideas based on their appearance, but to a certain extent, choices in personal appearance send a message of how one wishes to be regarded. I'm not sure what message Sheldon might subtly be making with his appearance, if at all, but the dreadlocks and the overgrown beard remind me of people who often ask me for spare change. He might be well meaning in his own mind, but he is grossly misinformed and confused about nuclear energy.