"Has McCain Done His Homework On Clean Energy?"

Sen. John McCain called Wednesday for the construction of 45 new nuclear reactors by 2030 and pledged $2 billion a year in federal funds "to make clean coal a reality," measures designed to reduce dependence on foreign oil.

McCain said the 104 nuclear reactors currently operating around the country produce about 20 percent of the nation's annual electricity needs.

"Every year, these reactors alone spare the atmosphere from the equivalent of nearly all auto emissions in America. Yet for all these benefits, we have not broken ground on a single nuclear plant in over thirty years," he said. "And our manufacturing base to even construct these plants is almost gone."

Even so, he said he would set the country on a course to build 45 new ones by 2030, with a longer-term goal of adding another 55 in the future.

"We will need to recover all the knowledge and skills that have been lost over three stagnant decades in a highly technical field," he conceded.

Later, at a news conference, McCain said he favors steps to reduce the time plant owners need to obtain the necessary permits. He also suggested U.S. companies use common technology to shave the time in takes to bring a new nuclear facility on line.

In an appearance before an audience at Missouri State University, McCain also said, "We will need to solve complex problems of moving and storing materials that will always need safeguarding."

Shortly after he spoke, a participant in a campaign-organized round-table discussion of energy, retired Marine Corps Gen. James Jones, said obtaining the necessary construction permits can take five years. "We should be able to cut that in half," added Jones, a former NATO commander who is now chief executive officer of the U.S. Chamber Institute for 21st Century Energy. He also is on the board of Chevron.

On Tuesday, McCain delivered a speech in Texas in which he made the case for a nationwide effort to reduce dependence on foreign oil, including additional drilling in U.S. coastal waters, and said he would begin laying out specific proposals in the coming days.

With his appearance in Missouri, he began making good on that promise.

The Republican presidential contender said Missouri gets about 85 percent of its electricity from coal, an abundant natural resource in the U.S.

"Perhaps no advancement in energy technology could mean more to America than the clean burning of coal and the capture and storage of carbon emissions," he said.

With the $2 billion in federal funds, he said, "We will build the demonstration plants, refine the techniques and equipment, and make clean coal a reality. This single achievement will open vast amounts of our oldest and most abundant resource. And it will deliver not only electricity but jobs to some of the areas hardest hit by our economic troubles."

Gov. Charlie Crist has dropped his long-standing support for the federal government's ban on offshore oil drilling and endorsed Republican presidential nominee-in-waiting John McCain's proposal to let states decide.

The governor said he reversed his position because of rising fuel prices and states' rights. Crist is considered a possible running mate for the Arizona senator.

"I mean, let's face it, the price of gas has gone through the roof, and Florida families are suffering," Crist said Tuesday. "And my heart bleeds for them."

Also backing offshore drilling is President Bush, who urged Congress on Wednesday to lift the drilling moratorium that has been in effect since 1981 in more than 80 percent of the country's Outer Continental Shelf.

Most Florida politicians have opposed drilling because they fear it would harm beaches vital to the state's tourism economy and interfere with weapons testing and training in and over the Gulf of Mexico by Florida military bases.

Democrats also argued additional offshore drilling would not affect prices set on the world market.

"It would only increase oil companies' record-breaking profits," said Florida Democratic Party spokesman Mark Bubriski.

Eric Draper, policy director for Audubon of Florida, said it would take 10 years to produce energy from new offshore leases even if exploration started now. He said conservation is a better solution.

"If you had an oil leak out there, an explosion, you would end up damaging all the beaches on the Gulf Coast," Draper said.

    The intertwined energy crisis and global warming are very important issues facing the next President of the United States. GOP Presidential hopeful Senator John McCain wants to resume the building of more nuclear power plants and off shore Florida drilling for oil, after a decades long moratorium of both here in America. In my opinion, the tremendous environmental risks involved in nuclear energy and off shore drilling far outweighs the benefits of either. Until we have the technology of safe nuclear waste storage and disposal, the moratorium on further nuclear plants should remain, along with off shore drilling in the Gulf States. McCain's call for the technology to produce "clean coal" may not be in America's best interests, according to some experts.

Prominent environmentalists, including Dan Becker, director of the Sierra Club's Global Warming and Energy Program, believe that the term clean coal is misleading: "There is no such thing as 'clean coal' and there never will be. It's an oxymoron". Complaints focus on the environmental impacts of coal extraction, high costs to sequester carbon, and uncertainty of how to manage end result pollutants and radionuclides. There are other forms of clean and renewable energy such as solar, wind and hydroelectric which are supported by many of the environmentalist groups and campaigns.

Critics of the planned power plants assert that there is no such thing as "clean coal" and that the plant will still release large amounts of pollutants compared to renewable energy sources such as wind power and solar power. They also point out that the continuing construction of coal-powered plants (whether or not they use carbon sequestration techniques) encourages unsustainable mining practices for coal, which can strip away mountains, hillsides, and natural areas. They also point out that there can be a large amount of energy required and pollution emitted in transporting the coal to the power plants. Some people contend that sequestrian technology has yet to be used or proven on such a large scale and that it may not be successful, lead to unexpected geological instability, contaminate groundwater supplies, and that sequestered CO2 may eventually "leak" up through the ground. There are also concerns that plans to possibly pump some of the sequestered CO2 into certain oil and gas reserves to help make the fuels easier to pump out of the ground will lead to increased concentrations of CO2 in potential fuel supplies which would have to be burned off during the refining process, thus adding to global warming.

     It appears to me that Senator John McCain hasn't done his "homework", when it comes to clean energy and America desperately needs a President that will do the "homework" necessary to begin solving the economic, energy and environmental problems facing America and the world today. Sounds like Senator Barack Obama to me.

tags: john mccain  clean energy  clean coal  nuclear energy  off shore drilling  politics  america  takebackamerica  2008  

links: digg this    del.icio.us    technorati    reddit