Italy's New Nukes And Our "No Nukes!"

Italy began the process yesterday of raising its arm toward OPEC and giving them the celebrated Italian version of the finger.

ROME (NYT) — Italy announced Thursday that within five years it planned to resume building nuclear energy plants, two decades after a public referendum resoundingly banned nuclear power and deactivated all its reactors.

“By the end of this legislature, we will put down the foundation stone for the construction in our country of a group of new-generation nuclear plants,” said Claudio Scajola, minister of economic development. “An action plan to go back to nuclear power cannot be delayed anymore.”

Italy joins Holland, Belgium, Sweden, Germany and others in reversing its long-held anti-nuclear position ... and results in the unpleasant reality that Europe actually is performing more intelligently than America. Do we all have to become liberals now?

Environmentalist opposition to nuclear power is thermo-hypocritical. They attack it because, although there's a fine place to stash spent rods under Yucca Mountain, there's no technology to convert the rods into a benign byproduct. Yet they want us to stop our reliance on oil and nukes in deference to a host of technologies that are technologically proven to be nowhere close to being able to fill the gap.

Do they want technological proof of solutions or not?

Three things stand in the way to greater US reliance on nukes: environmentalists, Harry Reid and production capacity.

We've covered the former, although the discussion is not complete without a reference to The China Syndrome, the post-Three Mile Island film starring Hanoi Jane as a crusading TV bubblehead. The film is as anti-capitalism as it is anti-nuke, and it turned a generation against nuclear power. The new generation hasn't seen this awful film, thank God, so maybe nukes can begin to move forward here ... unless Hollywood regurgitates it.

As for Harry Reid, he has his own hand gesture for nuclear power, standing defiant in his opposition to the nuclear waste repository under Yucca Mountain in one of the more bleak and desolate parts of his bleak and desolate state.

His opposition underscores the environmental and NIMBY battles that would be fought for years over the placement of a nuke anywhere in America. If we haven't built an oil refinery since the 1970s what makes anyone think we can actually get the national gumption to build a nuke in the spineless thou shalt not offend era in which we live today?

And finally, there's the market. Decades of doldrums in the nuclear industry has had its impact on reactor manufacturing capacity, and as the industry starts to wipe the sleep from its eyes, that capacity is maxed.

Given the environmentalists, NIMBYs and Reid, investing in nukes is a highly speculative proposition. So even if we played all our cards just right -- and we won't -- don't expect America to follow Italy any time soon ... especially without an honest and comprehensive energy policy.

The Pandering Party Gets It Wrong (Again)

John Edwards voted for the Yucca Mountain (NV) nuclear storage facility when he was in the Senate. Now that the Dems are whoring for votes in Nevada, guess what? He's against it!

Here's the NYT live blogging segment from the debate on the Yucca yuks:

10:27 p.m. | Yucca Mountain All three Democrats want to end the nuclear storage facility at Yucca Mountain in Nevada, in the same state where this debate is taking place. That happens to be the position of the Democrats’ majority leader, Harry Reid, who is from Nevada.

But Mr. Edwards takes his time to draw a difference among them, that Mr. Obama wants to build new nuke plants, Mrs. Clinton is agnostic on the question, and he, Mr. Edwards, is against any new plants. This gives Mrs. Clinton the chance to point out, gently, “But John, you did vote for Yucca Mountain, twice.”

Interesting that she’s been studying up on his record. What else is in the suitcase tonight?

While it's not mentioned there, Obama's against Yucca, too. What a shocker.

In an only slightly less irresponsible comment, Obama said he opposed dumping at Yucca even though his home state of Illinois has the most nuclear plants. Let's see whether we follow the logic: His state is contributing more to the problem than any other, but he opposes the only likely solution. (USA Today)

So among the potential Dem next presidents, one has found Gaea and is pandering to the Deep Greens, who want to forsake nuclear power forever, all the while bemoaning global warming, and two are OK with nuclear power, but only if you store the waste at each power plant site, where it cannot be secured for centuries, where it's close to big population centers, and where it's vulnerable to terrorist attack.

That's vision, my friends! That's CHANGE!

That's also why we can't trust the Dems with our future. If there were another site secure enough to deal with the Achilles heel of nuclear power, we would have found it. There isn't; it's Yucca Mountain or nothing.

Clinton and Obama are too terrified to make this point in Nevada, home of Harry Reid, and home of Dems who have made it their premier head- in- the- oh- so- prevalent sand issue in desert Nevada. Why? Because unlike the GOP, the Dems don't understand concepts like "greater public good."

This is curious, because at the macro level, i.e., when they're hiding in the distant bowels of Congress, they put the government above the individual, driving us to the Nanny State. At the local level, however, they stand for the Glorious Individual, who is supreme ... but only when you have to look those individuals in the eye.

Being the president of America requires having to make difficult decisions. Once again, the Dems have proven than pandering is their expertise, not leadership. And unfortunately, America is a country where the majority are registered members of the Pander To Me! Party.

Oh, did I say Yucca Mountain was the only viable nuclear waste disposal site? Today's USA Today editorial proves me wrong:

In the East, a spot that has been discussed as a promising place to store nuclear waste is the granite formations of, yes, New Hampshire, home to the nation's first presidential primary. As if!