Replies

“The real issue is nuclear proliferation. If the spread of weapons-grade nuclear material can be controlled; then we don’t need to worry about nuclear power plants.”

IMHO, you are terribly deluded on that point. IMO, a dirty bomb (which could use exactly the same material that is used in powerplants) would be just as economically devastating, because all the hand-wringers and bed-wetters in this country would completely cordon off a several mile radius around a dirty bomb explosion.

So although the actually bomb would only leave a tiny litte car size crater, the effect would be the complet abandonment of all of Manhattan or all of Long Beach Harbor.

OK, that's a good point about dirty bombs. Perhaps it is nieve to think that the nuclear material can be controlled. If there's no way to do that; then there is a rationale for preventing other nations from having nuclear power stations.

Regardless — nuclear power, and nuclear weapons are two separate things. It's easy to make a strong case for preventing weapons proliferation — the onus (IMHO) is on opponents to make the case against nuclear power plants.