EVANSTON -- Local environmental groups are "hot" about Clinton
Administration global warming "tricks" designed to promote an
expansion of nuclear power and use of carbon 'sinks' as allegedly
"sustainable" means of meeting its commitment to fighting global
warming. And they intend to try a few Halloween "tricks" of their own
to get the Administration to change its position.
"Promoting nuclear power and use of 'carbon sinks' as its means of
meeting global warming targets is ludicrous," states Dave Kraft,
Director of the Evanston-based Nuclear Energy Information Service,
Illinois' nuclear power watchdog group. "Substituting an increasing
number of nuclear power problems while trying to diminish global
warming ones is both irrational and unnecessary," Kraft says.
Rather than aggressively promoting truly sustainable resources like
renewable energy and energy efficiency, and committing to real
reductions in global warming gas emissions, the Clinton Administration
is attempting to get credit for "business as usual" methods and
practices -- building and selling more nuclear reactors, current
agricultural practices, and current practices of reforestation after
clear-cuts -- to avoid the pain of taking real action.
"It's 'business as usual' thinking that brought us to a global
crisis to begin with," Kraft notes. "For a decade the public in poll
after poll has been calling for increased support for renewable energy
and energy efficiency, and what does Clinton propose? Nukes and
sinks! Some environmental legacy," Kraft observes.
Environmental groups are opposing these end-of-term Administration
"tricks." A letter with signatures from well over 100 major
environmental groups and individuals has already gone to the
Administration opposing this proposal. A meeting in Washington on
Friday, October 27 produced little change in the Administration's
Environmental and safe-energy advocates argue that better means exist
to meet Treaty targets. For example, energy efficiency -- in spite of
being able to remove nearly seven times the atmospheric carbon per
dollar spent than nuclear power can, and do so four to twelve times
faster -- was not even a discussion topic in the previous global
warming meeting in September in Lyon, France. It is not on the COP-6
agenda. Third World budgets can afford the efficiency option, which
doesn't demand the same level of technological sophistication or
security requirements that nuclear power does. So, why isn't it being
promoted more aggressively by the Administration, they ask?
"Third World nations oppose this proposal. The Europeans oppose it.
The American public has repeatedly stated it doesn't want new nuclear
plants. This is beginning to look more like a term- ending 'payback'
for the nuclear power industry than sane public policy," Kraft
suggests. "The COP-6 meeting in the Hague begins on November 13th.
Whoever is in the White House at that time had better have a good
'duck' reflex if he attempts to continue this policy," Kraft warns.
"We have some 'tricks' of our own, too, you know."
Activists will be out on Halloween alerting people to the
Administration's global warming "tricks," and will continue public
awareness activities and events through the COP-6 meeting the week of
November 13-18 in the Hague, Netherlands.
NUCLEAR ENERGY INFORMATION SERVICE was established in 1981 to provide
the public with information about nuclear power and radioactive waste
hazards, and about viable energy alternatives to nuclear power. For more information: David A Kraft, Nuclear Energy Information Service, (847)869-7650