My article was called Nuclear Power: Time to End the Experiment. It was written by Pete Roche, a nuclear campaigner for Greenpeace. He has a degree in Ecological Science from Edinburgh University. He also worked for the Scottish Campaign to Resist the Atomic Menace. I'm telling you all this because he is a very credible person to be writing an article on these new nuclear reactors. He isn't just some bum off the streets.
I'd like to quote the first sentence, as he says, "As we enter the 21st century, we carry with us an outmoded, dangerous technology that has left a legacy of irretrievable contamination, and a trail of disease, death, and runaway costs. Nuclear power is clearly no longer economic, if it ever was." He continues by saying that huge sums of public money have been spent on these new reactors when it could have been better put to use creating new ways to create energy, like offshore windmills, or solar energy.
He exposes the true cost of nuclear technology, which is that we are wasting time that could be spent finding something new.
This article brings up the accidents, like Chernobyl and Three Mile Island. Next of course there is toxic waste. He then bashes the new reactors by saying that not one of them has operated efficiently. Sodium leaks and fires have plagued fast reactors in the UK, the Soviet Union, and Japan. He says that there is also a poor commercial case for recycling uranium. He concludes by saying that safeguarding such a quantity of fissile material is a major security problem. The entire article is very anti new nuclear reactors and kind of scares the reader into not wanting any part of them.