NUCLEAR POWER….Hmmm, a couple of liberal University of California professors with PhDs agree with the Harvard grad that nuclear power is good for us. Mark Kleiman makes the case for the defense here and Brad DeLong agrees with him here.
I’m still on the fence, though. If anyone wants to blog a case for the prosecution, let me know and I’ll link to it.
NOTE: Before commenting, at least read Mark’s piece, OK? There’s not much point arguing if you haven’t even read the opening statement.
UPDATE: One more thing. I know this isn’t entirely fair, but I’d also like to hear the public relations case for nukes, since it’s not enough for nuclear to simply be safe. In addition, you have to convince the public that nukes are safe, which is another thing entirely.
The big problem, I think, is that you can wave your hands all you want and say that Chernobyl doesn’t count (the Russians were idiots) and that Three Mile Island was a feature not a bug (containment worked!) and that naval accidents don’t count (um, er…) ? but nobody’s buying. There are still an awful lot of accidents and near misses to account for and you have to somehow convince people that there’s a genuinely safer, better way to handle nukes than the record indicates. But how?