|
To the Editor:
I enjoy your publication and would like to make a comment on the March 2008 editorial (“Florida Should Lead In Solar”) and subsequent letter on electric power.
First, of course, we should strive to conserve. Wind and solar can contribute a small part of our need but they are unpredictable, intermittent and unreliable. Still, we should strive for what we can achieve. Costa Rica uses 99.2% renewable and sustainable energy, primarily hydro. Due to favorable wind patterns, Costa Rica also uses a number of wind driven turbines and anticipates increased wind development.
It is ironic that beginning in 1973 with the first “oil shock” the independent minded French people opted for nuclear and that Westinghouse (then an American company, now Japanese) set up about 55 plants that now produce 76% of their electric need — and they export to Italy for a profit.
Pollutants and CO2 are reduced as well as cost. No radiation deaths related to the 104 U.S. nuclear power plants (20% of our electricity) have been reported while there are 5,000 coal mining deaths yearly, world wide.
No deaths resulted from Three Mile Island; the Russian plant operators literally blew themselves up at Chernobyl (56 deaths). The Yucca Mt. depository is properly prepared for our nuclear waste. The new AP 1009 (Westinghouse) nuclear generator has a high degree of safety, using passives such as gravity flow.
Coal, oil and other polluting systems have been disastrous for thousands of people. Nuclear is technologically safe, clean, affordable and is our only currently available solution. It will take 10 years or more to get it on-line. We better get started or forever be dependent on the Arabs.
Henry L. King
Clearwater
|
Front Page 
Op-Ed 
