USA Builds Nuclear Power Plant but Asks Other Countries to use Windmills
The USA decided to resume the development of the nuclear industry. Two new nuclear reactors are planned to be built in the State of Georgia. President Obama stated February 16 in Maryland that the US administration was ready to assign $8.3 billion of credit guarantees for the construction of a nuclear power plant.
Spokespeople for Southern Company, which is going to build the reactors, stated that the governmental funding would cover 70 percent of the cost of all works. The project totals $8.8 billion. The reactors are to be launched in 2016 or 2017.
The constriction of nuclear power plants in the United States was stopped in 1979 after a breakdown at a plant in Pennsylvania. Miscalculations resulted in the partial melting of the active part of the reactor and an emission of radioactive substances. Before the Chernobyl disaster it was the largest nuclear accident in the whole world.
After the nuclear disaster in Pennsylvania, the US considered an opportunity to refuse from the use of nuclear fuel in the energy industry. It was eventually decided not to shut down the plant – the reactors were suspended indefinitely for the time of the construction of new nuclear power plants.
Nowadays, there are 104 reactors and 65 nuclear power stations in 31 states of the country. US nuclear power plants produce 20 percent of all electric power in the United States.
The new plant in Georgia is going to be built at the location where the construction of a similar object was frozen in 1979.
It seems that the US government is seriously concerned about the revival of the nuclear program. According to Carol Browner, assistant to the president on Climate and Energy, the scheduled construction in Georgia will be a first step in a number of other nuclear projects.
It may mean that the construction of new nuclear stations marks the beginning of the reindustrialization of the country, if it is not a cover to a regular affair.
The construction of the nuclear power plant in Georgia will employ about 3,000 people. About 850 will be permanently employed at the station afterwards. Obama said that the new station would save the funds required for purchasing 30 million barrels of oil used as fuel for thermal stations. The project will be equal to the withdrawal of 3,500 cars from US roads, he added.
Hardly had Obama promised $8.3 billion for the nuclear industry when American ecologists showered him with criticism. All of them claimed that the US government was going to spend tax-payers’ money on potentially dangerous objects and pollute the US territory with radioactive waste. Some of them accused Obama of lies and reminded him of his own promises to build the future of pure energy in the country.
Adversaries of the nuclear program say that the project will eat up the funds assigned for the implementation of other state programs, including in the social field. Democrats may eventually lose popularity because of the project. However, opinion polls show that over 50 percent of Americans support the construction of the nuclear power plant.
The project obviously has a political side too. If the US builds a nuclear power plant and calls upon other countries to put up windmills and solar panels, this politics will looks quite bizarre.
|Why Iran? Why Does the US Use Two Sets of Weights and Measures?|
Iran remains the focus of the country's special "axis of evil," which was formally abolished, but not in reality, by the U.S. It is accompanied by Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador, in addition to North Korea, among others. Why Iran? The criteria mentioned by Hillary Clinton cannot be understood. Is it the risk of manufacturing nuclear weapons? Israel has openly implied that these weapons exist and threaten weekly to bomb Iran. Is it the risk of becoming a dictatorship? And what are countries like Saudi Arabia or Egypt, but dictatorships?
Is it that Iran represents a threat to its neighbors? Iran has not invaded any other country nor occupied any foreign territory. Since Israel occupies the Palestinian territories for over four decades and have proven to possess nuclear weapons, that cannot be it.
Iran is a religious state, Islamic, which favors the Shiites. But Israel is a Jewish state, no constitution, but favors the Jews, and the Palestinians who comprise 1 / 4 of the population, are forced to be second-class citizens.
Why two weights and two measures? Just because Israel is a valued ally in the U.S. - the country that receives more U.S. aid than any other in the world - while Iran is opposing the U.S. Simply this. To check this notice that Hillary does not criticize the dictatorships in Saudi Arabia or Egypt - these, being the second in North American military aid? Because they are faithful allies to the U.S.
What about the Treaty on nuclear weapons? It is not one of denuclearization, but non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. That is, to have nuclear weapons, and to try to prevent others from having them. China broke the door and immediately joined the Security Council when it manufactured nuclear weapons. It is clear that Pakistan, India and Israel have nuclear weapons. The U.S. not only has an attitude quite different for Israel, but supports it militarily - including in nuclear terms - only these certain countries.
The fight has to be for denuclearization. Why does a country need to have nuclear weapons? For what purpose?
The non-proliferation treaty aims to protect the nuclear power of the great powers, those that are more involved in wars and in the manufacture of armaments. Denuclearization is the struggle to end nuclear weapons. Beginning with those holding the largest stockpiles of the world.
Translated from the Portuguese version by: Lisa KARPOVA
If true Iran going too far:
Airlines must say 'Persian Gulf' or face Iranian airspace ban