Nuclear Power=Green Energy?
Posted by languageandgrammar on July 10, 2008
I recently heard on television that nuclear power is the ultimate green energy source, and I wasn’t sure whether the person speaking didn’t realize the inanity of her statement or she just has a different definition of green energy than most of us do.
Green energy is a relatively new term, and as with all new terms, the definition is not always as clear as the definition of an established term might be. Generally, though, green energy seems to be energy that is produced in a way that does little or no damage to the environment.
That’s certainly what I think of when I hear nuclear power–safe for the environment. Yes, it’s completely safe for the environment—except for the possibility of a failure at the power plant that could kill tens of thousands of people and pollute food and water sources for decades to follow. I’m sure that it’s also very safe for the environment when we bury radioactive waste deep under the ground in areas such as the Nevada deserts. To be fair, the contamination risk for the waste under the ground will only last for a couple of thousand years–what are the odds that there will be an earthquake in that short of a time period? It’s not as if the western part of the country has any fault lines.
Seriously, nuclear power is the ultimate green energy source? I don’t know what would be worse– whether the person actually believes that nuclear energy is “green” or whether she thinks that we’re dumb enough to believe it.
Paul’s book–Literally, the Best Language Book Ever;
2 Responses to “Nuclear Power=Green Energy?”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.