Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 2 Share on Twitter 2 Share on LinkedIn Share on Reddit Tell A Friend Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites
OpEdNews Op Eds

The Green New Deal Promises Peace and Progress. Will Nuclear Advocates Undermine it?

By   Follow Me on Twitter     Message Harvey Wasserman       (Page 1 of 2 pages)     Permalink    (# of views)   4 comments

Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags
Add to My Group(s)

Valuable 3   Must Read 2   Well Said 2  
View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com Headlined to H1 12/29/18

Author 1642
Become a Fan
  (21 fans)

From The Progressive

- Advertisement -

The environmental policy centerpiece of the incoming Democratic House of Representatives has ignited tremendous grassroots enthusiasm.

From youtube.com: Poll Shows Majority Of Americans -- Including Republicans -- LOVE Ocasio-Cortez's Green New Deal {MID-339355}
Poll Shows Majority Of Americans -- Including Republicans -- LOVE Ocasio-Cortez's Green New Deal
(Image by YouTube, Channel: The Ring of Fire)
  Permission   Details   DMCA

The environmental policy centerpiece of the incoming Democratic House of Representatives is what's now known as "The Green New Deal." But it's already hit deeply polarizing pushback from the old-line Democratic leadership. And it faces divisive jockeying over the future of nuclear power.

- Advertisement -

The Green New Deal's most visible public advocate, newly elected 29-year-old U.S. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Democrat of New York, has laid out a preliminary blueprint advocating an energy economy meant to be based entirely on "renewable" and "clean" sources. According to a report in The Hill, fossil fuels and nuclear power are "completely out" of her plan.

The draft proposal has ignited tremendous grassroots enthusiasm, with massively favorable poll readings, even among some Republicans. Substantial grassroots pressure has grown on presumptive House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to form a Green New Deal Committee chaired by Ocasio-Cortez.

But on December 20, the Democratic leadership announced it will not support a separate House Committee on the deal. Instead, it will proceed with a panel on climate change, to be chaired by Florida Representative Kathy Castor, who has taken substantial funding from the fossil fuel industry. It remains unclear whether Ocasio-Cortez will even get a seat on the committee.

- Advertisement -

But the grassroots push for a Green New Deal is clearly not going to go away. The youthful Sunrise Movement has vowed to fight for it, along with a wide range of others, including Senator Bernie Sanders, Independent of Vermont, a likely 2020 presidential contender.

The Green New Deal idea conjures visions of the vast "alphabet agency" programs birthed by Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt in the 1930s.

With unparalleled pageantry, New Deal Democrats put millions of Americans to work building roads, bridges, schools, libraries, museums, public swimming pools, local and national parks, and more. They proved that immense communal good could come from a solid government blueprint administered through a competent, well-orchestrated brain trust.

In contrast, the Trump Administration's promise to deal with "infrastructure" has involved none of the above. While denying the disaster of climate change, its energy policies have focused purely on handing cheap fossil drilling leases on public land (and waters) to Trump cronies.

It's also granted a $3.7 billion low-interest loan (added to $8.3 billion previously granted by President Obama) to private developers of the last two U.S. nuclear reactors under construction, at Vogtle, Georgia. Already years behind schedule and billions over budget, the project may soar beyond $20 billion and still never be finished.

The fate of the Vogtle plant underscores a nuclear war that will cut to the heart of the Green New Deal and the climate issue as it plays out in the new Congress.

- Advertisement -

Already, The New York Times, with its long history of reactor advocacy, has featured an op-ed by U.S. Senator John Barrasso, Republican of Wyoming, advocating more nukes as a solution to the climate crisis. In an article running under a photo of a Chinese reactor under construction, Barrasso argues that "nuclear energy is produced with zero carbon emissions."

In fact, nuclear reactors do emit trace quantities of radioactive Carbon-14. The fuel rods that power reactor are produced with significant carbon in mining, milling, and enrichment. They pump huge quantities of waste heat directly into the eco-sphere, operating far less efficiently even than coal burners. They yield large quantities of radioactive waste, directly related to nuke weapons production. And five of them (Chernobyl 4 and Fukushima 1-2-3-4) have blown up.

Reactor enthusiasts like Barrasso invariably conjure visions of a "new generation" of small, modular nukes, and other techno-variants like molten salt and thorium, alleged to be safe, cleaner and cheaper that the current fleet. But there are few tangible indications such alternative reactors can come on line anytime soon, or beat the price of wind and solar, which continue to plummet. The criticism that renewables are intermittent is also losing its sting as large-scale battery arrays are also dropping in price while rising in efficiency and capacity.

Next Page  1  |  2

 

- Advertisement -

Valuable 3   Must Read 2   Well Said 2  
View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com

Harvey is a lifelong activist who speaks, writes and organizes widely on energy, the environment, election protection, social justice, grass-roots politics and natural healing, personal and planetary.He hosts "California Solartopia" at KPFK-Pacifica and "Green Power & Wellness" atprn.fm. (more...)
 

Harvey Wasserman Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Follow Me on Twitter     Writers Guidelines
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEdNews Newsletter
Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Will 9 GOP governors put Romney in the White House?

Four Ways Ohio Republicans are Already Stealing the 2012 Election

Toll of U.S. Sailors Devastated by Fukushima Radiation Continues to Climb

Is Fukushima now ten Chernobyls into the sea?

Humankind's Most Dangerous Moment: Fukushima Fuel Pool at Unit 4. "This is an Issue of Human Survival."

Japan's Quake Could Have Irradiated the Entire US

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

4 people are discussing this page, with 4 comments


Art Costa

Become a Fan
Author 48718

(Member since May 19, 2010), 1 fan, 366 comments
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


  New Content

Need a replacement system. This one chews change up and spits it out.

Submitted on Saturday, Dec 29, 2018 at 3:44:33 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (0+)
Help
 

Chuck Nafziger

Become a Fan
Author 24101

(Member since Oct 12, 2008), 15 fans, 6 articles, 11 quicklinks, 1740 comments
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


  New Content

If we need support from mainstream Goldman Sacks Democrats to save humanity from extinction, we are toast.

Submitted on Saturday, Dec 29, 2018 at 8:40:06 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (0+)
Help
 
Indent

Harvey Wasserman

Become a Fan
Author 1642
Follow Me on Twitter
(Member since May 16, 2006), 21 fans, 168 articles, 8 quicklinks, 85 comments
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


Reply to Chuck Nafziger:   New Content

yep. time for a new paradigm.

Submitted on Saturday, Dec 29, 2018 at 10:09:45 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (0+)
Help
 

William WAUGH

Become a Fan
Author 505853

(Member since Jun 8, 2016), 53 comments
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in


Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit


  New Content

The use or not of nuclear fission should be an engineering decision, powered by numbers, not a political decision, powered by not-numbers. Before your political advocacy can have any power, we have to hear from the engineers how many count of already-born human beings have to go to an early death as a result of each decision (e. g nukes or no-nukes), and what is the likely lifetime of the human species in each case. If you are going to argue, at least bring numbers. How much power the people need, how much land is going to be used up to harvest it, and what other land uses are thereby locked out, and how many are going to starve as a result. And many other numbers besides. All the downsides of your proposed solutions.

The main trouble with the Ocasio-Cortez proposal is that it invites capitalists to the discussion.

Submitted on Sunday, Dec 30, 2018 at 1:45:57 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (0+)
Help
 

 
Want to post your own comment on this Article? Post Comment