'Dirty energy' doesn't protect climate

O n May 23, John McCain asked Lieberman to add nuclear subsidies to the "Climate Security Act," S.2191. Joe Lieberman has floated an amendment to the global warming bill that would take funds away from clean energy sources like wind and solar and earmark them for the nuclear industry. That means dirty energy in the name of climate protection.

The Climate Security Act is already inadequate to meet the challenges we face from global warming. On the surface, it appears to bring solutions but it could contain at least $544 billion in taxpayer subsidies for the nuclear industry. This is the biggest federal handout in history for the nuclear industry, which is already the most heavily subsidized energy sector over the past 50 years.

Nuclear power plants create nuclear waste. The government takes our tax dollars and tries to find a place to store it for the next 100,000 years. Right now they want to dump radioactive waste in Yucca Mountain in Nevada. It is said to be one of the most costly engineering efforts in history at $70 billion, and would eventually store 70,000 metric tons of waste since the first reactors were built.

After 50 years of unresolved safety and waste disposal issues, I am stunned that congress would support these massive subsidies for the nuclear industry. To encourage new construction of nuclear plants is insane.

Taxpayers should not be asked to continue bankrolling a nuclear power industry that has never been environmentally or financially viable. This legislation is on the senate floor this week. We need to stop this dirty energy in the name of climate protection. Ask your senator to come up with a real solution to global warming, which includes clean energy sources such as wind and solar.

RUTH A. REMPLE

Longmont