Letters to the Editor: The most toxic substance on the face of the earth

·2 min read

Most toxic substance on face of the earth

Your front page article (Sunday, Jan. 23, “Majority of US states pursue nuclear power for emission cuts”) states renewable power sources might not be enough to keep the lights on. It adds nuclear power is emerging as an answer to fill the gap as we move from carbon fuels.

This sounds like more nuclear industry hokum. On the front end of the complex process of mining, milling and enriching uranium, there are tremendous amounts of fossil fuels being burned.

The article continues: “Nuclear Power comes with its own set of problems.” Think of Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima. The greatest problem is: “The U.S. has no long-term plans for managing or disposing of the waste that can persist in the environment for hundreds of thousands of years,” it says.

It is the most toxic substance on the face of the earth and there’s no safe way to dispose of it. We are seeing this problem at Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station with the horrifying thought of Holtec releasing radiated water into Cape Cod Bay!

The article puts out the hope for developing smaller, cheaper reactors, also known as small modular reactors. The nuclear industry just asks for more time and hundreds of billions of dollars for development and research.

All this leaves me with three questions. 1: Couldn't that time, money and research be better spent on renewables? 2: Isn't this the same old saw the nuclear industry peddled in the 1950s and 1960s when they predicted that nuclear power would be too cheap to meter? 3: How gullible does the nuclear industry think the American public is?

Elaine Dickinson, Harwich

See the details on Woods Hole terminal build

Last week the Steamship Authority held a community input meeting on the proposed Woods Hole 90% new terminal construction design.

I would encourage all Cape and Island stakeholders (that is every one of us) to watch the meeting by searching YouTube with the words "Woods Hole Terminal Landside Project Community Forum."

Whether you support the SSA's growth plans or not, it is an informative and valuable presentation on two fronts: The architects describe the drawings and overlays and one can get an idea of the full scope of this land-based project. Secondly, the post-presentation public comment session provides insights into the SSA's operations and the architects' business practices.

The comment session ends with an astounding reveal in bar graph form of the scope of the physical non-tax-paying footprint of the SSA in Falmouth.

Pam Stark, Woods Hole

This article originally appeared on Cape Cod Times: no safe way to dispose of nuclear waste

Our goal is to create a safe and engaging place for users to connect over interests and passions. In order to improve our community experience, we are temporarily suspending article commenting