Joshua Emerson Smith opines that the words nuclear power once sent chills down the spines of everyone from school children to grandparents. During the 1970s and 80s, televisions routinely broadcast footage of protests against the construction of new reactors. Americans feared that radiation leaks would harm legions of people. In the public imagination today, images of mushroom clouds have to a notable extent been replaced by scenes of melting glaciers, flooding from sea-level rise and demonstrations over oil and gas pipeline projects. Individuals might still harbor concerns about their local nuclear power plant, such as the debate on how best to store spent uranium from the shuttered San Onofre facility in northwestern San Diego County.
But experts agree the widespread alarm, the fevered opposition that became the stuff of Hollywood movie plots in bygone decades has largely died down because those fears were unfounded. In fact, worries about climate change have renewed support for nuclear power among some environmentalists. The relatively small carbon footprint is prompting a cautious rethinking, even among people who once demonstrated on the front lines against splitting atoms for electricity. Prominent environmental organizations have downscaled or shifted their focus away from nuclear issues. Perhaps the best-known is Greenpeace, which launched its anti-nuclear campaign in 1971. Today, the group has mostly disbanded its efforts to oppose such power plants in the U.S. It is not that they are not concerned about nuclear plants. But the biggest threat they perceive to the stability of our climate and environment now is the oil and gas industry, said Jason Schwartz, spokesman for Greenpeace on climate and energy issues. The U.S. cultural shift on nuclear power is driven by a mix of factors. For one, nuclear power has logged an enviable pollution and safety record when compared with fossil fuels.
Managed & Built by I2M Consulting, LLC | © 2010-
