Nader is pro-nuclear? (or maybe not)

["Jim F. Herrold" <Herrold@uwyo.edu>]

I saw an article in the October 2000 issue of Environmental Protection
magazine on "Ballot 2000" in which Bush, Gore and Nader were asked questions
on global warming and alternate energy sources, along with other
environmental concerns. It is not surprising that Bush and Gore both
side-step nuclear power in their answers. What surprised me was Nader's
response to global warming:

"Our response to global warming must include the following: Increased use of
renewable energy and diminished use of fossil fuels, especially for electric
power generation; improved fuel efficiency of all vehicles; improved
efficiency of all appliances and industrial equipment; the elimination of
all subsidies for fossil fuel; and nuclear development and production." 
The full context of the candidate's answers can be found at
http://www.eponline.com/  If you go there, you may get a different
interpretation of Nader's position. On the web version there is a semicolon
missing between "fossil fuel" and "and nuclear" so it reads: 
"...the elimination of all subsidies for fossil fuel and nuclear development
and production." 
So, which is it? Is Nader pro-nuclear development or anti-subsidies for
nuclear development? To read properly, the statement needs to have the
semicolon or an "and" should appear after "industrial equipment." Either
way, I admire Ralph Nader for even raising the subject of nuclear power. The
omission by the other candidates shows lack of nerve and foresight.
Obviously, my opinion only. Heck, Nader isn't even on the ballot in Wyoming.

Jim F. Herrold
Radiation Safety Officer
herrold@uwyo.edu

University of Wyoming
Environmental Health & Safety 
303 Merica Hall
Laramie, WY 82071


************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html