[ RadSafe ] Provocation (Obama makes nuclear compromise to pass clean energy bill)

[Maury Siskel]

Please examine closely the so-called endorsements of nuclear power by 
Obama. I think you will see that there are sufficient qualifiers and 
stipulations to suggest that any actual favorable movement toward 
nuclear power under the Obama Administration is very unlikely.
Best,
Maury&Dog (MaurySiskel  maurysis at peoplepc.com)
======================
Perle, Sandy wrote:

>Franz,
>
>Here is "one" example, not just by words but by actual endorsement.
>
>Regards,
>
>Sandy
>-----------------------------
>
>Guardian, July 8, 2009
>
>Obama makes nuclear compromise to pass clean energy bill
>
>Endorsement of nuclear revival suggests president is open to further compromises in order to pass climate change bill
>
>The Obama administration endorsed a revival of America's nuclear industry yesterday in an effort to build forward momentum for climate change legislation before the Senate.
>
>The seal of approval for nuclear power - a cause embraced by Republican senators - came on day one of a full-on lobbying effort by the White House for one of Obama's signature issues.
>
>Obama sent four of his top lieutenants to the Senate - his secretaries of energy, interior, agriculture and the head of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) - to try to drum up support for a global warming bill.
>
>The PR effort saw direct appeals to the farming and nuclear lobbies - some of the fiercest critics of Obama's clean energy agenda - with Steven Chu, the Nobel-winning energy secretary, calling for new nuclear plants to re-establish America's technological dominance in the world.
>
>"I think nuclear power is going to be a very important factor in getting us to a low carbon future," Chu told the Senate's environment and public works committee. "Quite frankly, we want to recapture the lead on industrial nuclear power. We have lost that lead as we have lost the lead in many energy technologies and we want to get it back."
>
>The endorsement of a nuclear revival - a generation after the last reactor was commissioned - suggests the Obama administration is open to further compromises as it seeks to find a path through the Senate. The House of Representatives narrowly passed a climate change bill late last month.
>
>Republicans in the Senate, who are almost universally opposed to action aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions, as well as Democrats from rust belt states, have been clamouring for a "nuclear renaissance" in America, which would see the construction of 100 new nuclear power plants by 2030.
>
>The administration officials also tried to make inroads among the powerful farmers' lobby, saying they hoped the effort could help ensure passage of the bill through the Senate.
>
>Yesterday's hearing marks the opening round of a second major push by the White House for Obama's climate and energy agenda.
>
>Obama is in Europe where he hopes to persuade the G8 to commit to limiting global warming to 2C, and to persuade Russia to make its lumbering industries more efficient.
>
>But the White House acknowledges it must also demonstrate American willingness by ensuring passage of a climate bill through both houses of Congress by December, when international climate change negotiations end in Copenhagen. It is widely believed that the international community will not sign up to action on climate change without evidence of US commitment.
>
>The Democratic leadership in the Senate hopes to use the house bill as a template. It has pencilled in a schedule that would see the bill clear the committee process by mid-September and move to vote by late autumn.
>
>But the way ahead is daunting. Despite the Democrats' 77-seat advantage in the house, the bill gained just 219 votes - one more than a bare majority - and the reform package had swollen to more than 1,427 pages. Much of that bloat was in the political sops to ensure the bill's support: concessions to farmers that ultimately damage the bill, protectionist measures to help heavily polluting industries - and even a hurricane centre in Florida.
>
>The administration's case is also damaged by rising criticism of the bill, from environmentalists who say it does not go far enough as well as those opposed to any action.
>
>Lisa Jackson, head of the EPA, stopped short of endorsing the package yesterday, saying: "It sends the right signal and you all in the Senate have work to do."
>
>But she said the Senate had little choice, and that inaction on climate change could lead to America's global economic decline.
>
>"Clean energy is to this decade and the next what the space race was to the 1950s and 60s and America is behind," Jackson told the Senate. "Governments in Asia and Europe are ahead of the United States in making aggressive investments in clean energy technology."
>
>-----------------------------------
>Sander C. Perle
>President
>Mirion Technologies
>Dosimetry Services Division
>2652 McGaw Avenue
>Irvine, CA 92614
>
>+1 (949) 296-2306 (Office)
>+1 (949) 296-1144 (Fax)
>
>Mirion Technologies: http://www.mirion.com/
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On Behalf Of Franz Schönhofer
>Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 1:56 PM
>To: radsafe at radlab.nl
>Subject: [ RadSafe ] Provocation
>
>RADSAFErs, especially the US-Hardliners,
>
>Franz Schoenhofer, PhD
>MinRat i.R.
>Habicherg. 31/7
>A-1160 Wien/Vienna
>AUSTRIA
>
>RADSAFErs,
>
>I post this message deliberately as a provocation. I got tired about all
>those messages on climate change on RADSAFE and separately all those
>messages in the international press about the US-presidents presumed
>announcements in Copenhagen.
>
>Even more I get fed up by the fact that the same person, who is the
>president of the state that enhances worldwide armament and is the worldwide
>largest exporter of weapons, wages war in two countries without any UN
>justification - and gets awarded with the Peace Nobel Prize!!! What do you
>want to hear else?
>
>Furthermore what are the merits of the same president to curb CO2 emissions?
>Has he ever done anything to promote nuclear energy - I mean not by words,
>but by doings?
>
>I ask you for serious answers!
>
>Franz
>
>
>  
>