Environment: The Great Nuclear Debate

(5 of 5)

Despite its drawbacks, nuclear power is a necessity. Utilities are not building any more power plants that burn increasingly costly oil and natural gas. Production of coal — the one plentiful U.S. energy resource — can be expanded, though mining and burning it cause a host of environmental and public health problems. As for the alternate energy sources — sunshine, winds, the earth's heat — none of them is likely to generate significant amounts of electricity for decades. A strong effort to promote energy conservation — the critics' favorite solution — is surely needed. But even with sharp cutbacks in energy use, the country's need for electricity is bound to grow with the population and industry — and with new uses for the power, like more mass transit and recycling of raw materials. Thus the U.S. really has no choice but to use all of its possible domestic energy sources. At least until something better comes along, the mix must include nukes.

* A total of at least $10 billion in federal funds to develop a commercial fast breeder reactor by the mid-1980s.

Quotes of the Day »

Get & Share
PETER H. SCHULTZ, professor of geological sciences at Brown University and co-investigator of the mission that said it found water on the moon Friday
For use in rail of Articles page or Section Fronts pages. Duplicate and change name as necesssary to distinguish.

Time.com on Digg

POWERED BY digg

Quotes of the Day »

Get & Share
PETER H. SCHULTZ, professor of geological sciences at Brown University and co-investigator of the mission that said it found water on the moon Friday

Stay Connected with TIME.com