... another divisive issue. Is this a largely censored subject where science is not unanimous but authoritarian corporatists are? Isn't it afterall 'another', "it's for your own good" encrouchment rationale?

Additional links, pro and con, at the end. I thought this one was curious:

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=%5C%5CCulture%5C%5Carchive%5C%5C200512%5C%5CCUL20051207a.html

given what should be verifiable information.

and now, for a different perspective

Nuclear Energy Debate Turns Radioactive at Climate Conference

"It is the environmental movement itself that is the primary impediment to the reduction of CO2 emission and fossil fuel consumption because they refuse to support the obvious alternatives" (nuclear power and hydro power), Moore told Cybercast News Service. Moore's pro-nuclear discussion at the U.N. conference on Monday evening drew skepticism and jeers from his former environmental colleagues. By Marc Morano CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer December 08, 2005 http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=\Culture\archive\200512/CUL20051208b.html

Montreal (CNSNews.com) - Nuclear energy would reduce the world's dependence on fossil fuels and help cut greenhouse gas emissions, said advocates at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Montreal.

"Expanding nuclear energy is one way that we can actually [reduce] reliance on fossil fuels in a big way," said Patrick Moore, a founding member of Greenpeace. Moore left the group in the 1980s after becoming disillusioned with what he considered the group's radical approach to environmental concerns. He currently heads the Canadian-based environmental advocacy group Greenspirit Strategies, and he blames liberal green groups for halting the expansion of nuclear energy.

"It is the environmental movement itself that is the primary impediment to the reduction of CO2 emission and fossil fuel consumption because they refuse to support the obvious alternatives" (nuclear power and hydro power), Moore told Cybercast News Service. Moore's pro-nuclear discussion at the U.N. conference on Monday evening drew skepticism and jeers from his former environmental colleagues.

Moore, who rejects alarmist predictions of human-caused "global warming," also praised the United States for refusing to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, calling the treaty "a colossal waste of time and money." ( See related article )

But it was Moore's promotion of nuclear energy that met swift resistance by the movement he helped to found.

"History has shown [nuclear energy] is a problematic technology," said Kaisa Kosonen, an energy campaigner for Greenpeace Nordic, told Cybercast News Service.

Kosonen wants to see existing nuclear power phased out. She warned that creating more nuclear material creates attractive targets for terrorists. "I would not take that risk," she said.

Friends of the Earth International (FOEI) shared Greenpeace's anti-nuclear position.

"We don't support it. [Nuclear] represents a massive challenge, not only economically, but radioactive waste still represents a massive problem and quite frankly it's not particularly popular with the public," said Catherine Pearce, an international climate campaigner for FOEI.

Both Greenpeace and FOEI want to encourage the world to turn to renewable energy sources such as solar and wind power.

Fossil fuels currently make up about 85 percent of the world's energy consumption, followed by nuclear and hydro power at seven percent each. Only one percent of energy consumption comes from sources such as solar, wind and geothermal, according to Moore.

"We don't see any scenario where windmills and solar panels alone can solve the problem [of fossil fuel dependence,]" Moore said.

Moore praised nuclear energy for its reactor safety record and waste storage methods. He also dismissed concerns about two high-profile nuclear reactor accidents in the past.

"[Pennsylvania's] Three Mile Island was a success story," he said. "Radiation did not escape from Three Mile Island [in 1979]," Moore said, because a containment structure prevented radioactive leakage.

"[The Soviet Union's] Chernobyl [accident] was a sad accident waiting to happen because of the Soviet design and bad management," Moore said of the 1986 incident that killed 56 people.

Moore also dismissed fears of a nuclear plant being the target of terrorism. "Sure there is a possibility of nuclear terrorism, but all technology can be used for harm," he said.

"You don't ban technologies that are being used for good purposes just because they can also be used for evil," he added.

Anti-nuclear movies such as the Jane Fonda's "The China Syndrome" in 1979 further raised public fears about nuclear energy, Moore said.

"We have a population that is more afraid of nuclear when its record is far safer than many other technologies that we have," he said. "There is no basis for this fear. Nuclear is safe."

More than 8,000 government leaders, environmentalists and scientists are attending the U.N. conference to discuss ways of further limiting greenhouse gases beyond the provision set out in the Kyoto Protocol. Organizers are calling the conference, which runs until Dec. 9, the largest meeting since the Kyoto Climate Change Conference in 1997.

See Related Articles: Former Greenpeace Co-Founder Praises US for Rejecting Kyoto (Dec. 8, 2005) Climatologist Rejects 'Global Warming' as Cause for Island Evacuation (Dec. 7, 2005) Wealthy Nations Owe 'Climate Debt' to Poor, Greens Say (Dec. 7, 2005) Men Warm Globe, Women Feel the Heat, Group Claims (Dec. 6, 2005) Kyoto Protocol Declared 'Dead' at UN Climate Conference (Dec. 6, 2005) US Called 'Only Real Problem' at UN Climate Conference (Dec. 3, 2005)

"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism since it is the merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini