In free-market obsessed UK, "The Labour government sees nuclear power as one of the most effective weapons in the fight against climate change and in efforts to reduce the country's growing dependence on imported fossil fuels. But that does not mean it will pay for or build nuclear plants. "The government is not going to build a single nuclear power station," Trade and Industry Secretary Alistair Darling told a committee of members of parliament. "If the energy generators don't want to build them, then there won't be any," he said. All of Britain's existing nuclear power plants were paid for and built by the state, but none has been built since Britain privatized its power sector in the 1990s." Meanwhile, back in socialist USA, where tax money has traditionally been appropriated to make an inefficient energy technology profitable, "President Bush promoted nuclear power Wednesday as part of his answer to energy and environmental problems as more companies consider taking advantage of government incentives to build the nation's first new nuclear plant in decades. In the shadow of twin giant cooling towers, Bush said that his plan to expand nuclear power would curb emissions contributing to global warming [we thought that was caused by solar cycles?] and would provide an "abundant and plentiful" alternative to limited energy sources. Bush called the nuclear sector an "over-regulated industry" and pledged to work to make it more feasible to build reactors."""There seems that there's every reason to do this," said Kevin Book, an energy policy analyst at the Arlington-based investment firm Friedman Billings Ramsey Group Inc. But he said many administration officials and lawmakers believe power companies are holding out for even bigger subsidies."
The answer to the nuclear waste problem? Not to worry. Clearly, the answer to climate change is to stop making sense.
Image credit:: Limerick Plant, NukeWorker