In his response to a recent Columbian editorial on nuclear power, Roger Lippman is wrong that we should not choose more nuclear power plants (“Nuclear energy doesn’t add up,” Our Readers’ Views, July 22). Perhaps he missed the statement in the editorial by climate scientists that, “In the real world there is no credible path to climate stabilization that does not include a substantial role for nuclear power.”
Nuclear power can be safe. The U.S. Navy has over 70 submarines and 11 aircraft carriers, all powered by nuclear reactors. (Carriers have two.) They have operated without incident for decades, at sea no less.
Every solar and wind farm that is created reduces some of the carbon-creating power that must be generated. Carbon-generating power must now be generated this way because when the wind does not blow or the sun does not shine, wind and solar power is not generated.
Climate change is already here. The proof is found in every daily edition of reliable news media. Replacing carbon-creating power plants with carbon-free nuclear power is the only way to reduce our carbon generation to zero.
So our choice is between the small possibility of an accident in a nuclear power plant that will cause a localized problem somewhere and the absolute certainty that without nuclear power, climate change will worsen and threaten all life on Earth.