Senator
U.S. Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510

RE: Do NOT promote nuclear power

Dear Senator ,

As an American deeply concerned about our nation’s national, economic, energy and environmental security, I strongly urge you to ensure that the comprehensive energy bill, as well as any other legislation passed this year, does NOT promote nuclear power development. Nuclear power is NOT the answer to our energy needs. It poses huge security and environmental threats, and is extremely expensive, requiring massive taxpayer subsidies to make it competitive with other energy sources.

The security threats of nuclear power are huge. The 9/11 Commission noted in June 2004 that al-Qaeda’s original plan for September 11 was to hijack 10 airplanes and crash two of them into nuclear plants. A successful attack would release "large quantities of radioactive materials to the environment." A September 2004 study found that a worst-case accident or attack at the Indian Point nuclear plant 35 miles north of New York City could cause up to 43,700 immediate fatalities and up to 518,000 long-term cancer deaths. Such a release could cost up to $2.1 trillion and force the permanent relocation of 11.1 million people.

Even without a terrorist attack, nuclear power poses significant dangers. The safe operation of nuclear plants ought to be the paramount mission of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), but recent events and trends indicate a policy that is overly accommodating to the wishes of industry--even to the point where safety has been compromised. The risk of a catastrophic accident at a nuclear power plant remains, and the NRC has failed to do all in its power to ensure that that risk is minimized.

There is no safe way to store nuclear waste, which remains dangerous for millions of years. This waste poses a serious danger to human health, and because of its toxicity and longevity, we are unable to truly manage and contain it. Currently, over 2,000 metric tons of high-level radioactive waste and 12 million cubic feet of low-level radioactive waste are produced annually by the 103 operating reactors in the United States. Over 50,000 metric tons of irradiated fuel has already accumulated at the sites of commercial nuclear reactors. No country in the world has found a solution for its high level waste. Building new nuclear plants would mean the production of much more of this waste with nowhere to go. And the proposed geologic repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada is beset with problems, and may very well never open.

Clearly, the risks and expense of nuclear power far outweigh the benefits. There are real, sensible, and safe alternatives--energy efficiency programs and clean energy technologies such as wind and solar. Stanford researchers recently found that wind energy, if even partially harnessed, can generate more than enough power to satisfy the entire world's energy demands. Their report was published in May in the Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres, a publication of the American Geophysical Union.

Please make it your highest priority to ensure that any future energy legislation does NOT provide any further subsidy or support for nuclear power and instead supports energy efficiency and renewable energy programs. Our future depends on it.