On what the Sendai earthquake means for US energy policy

The earthquake and tsunami last Friday which devastated the northeastern coast of Japan is a terrible natural disaster and my thoughts go out to the people of that great nation.  It's not the most devastating natural disaster by far, due in no small part to Japan being a more technologically advanced society with better building codes, but it will still have far-reaching consequences for Japan and the rest of the world.

One of those consequences will result from the ongoing crisis at Japan's Fukushima nuclear power plants.  At the Fukushima-daiichi plant, two reactor buildings have already exploded due to the build-up of hydrogen which resulted from attempts to cool the reactors with seawater.  As far as we currently know, the reactor containment vessels are still intact, though at least one of the reactors has undergone partial melting of the nuclear fuel.  The reactors were shutdown ("scrammed") when the earthquake hit but the fuel will continue to emit residual heat for several days.  Cooling systems were damaged or rendered inoperable so the reactors are still very hot.  They should cool in time but for now the goal is to prevent total meltdown.

Nuclear power is currently the most "green" energy source we have that is economically and technologically feasible.  Other "green" sources are still being researched and none of them currently are capable of being implemented in a way that will provide a reasonable supply of electricity, let alone be cost-effective.  Until something better comes along (such as the development of nuclear fusion as an energy source instead of a weapon), nuclear fission is the only significant energy source that does not involve burning something or, as in the case of hydro-electric dams, other large environmental impacts.

In the United States, no new nuclear power plants have been constructed since the Three Mile Island incident over 30 years ago.  That incident was worse than the current situation in Japan and there was little to no effect on public health.  Recently there have been a few additional licenses granted for new reactors in a limited effort to expand the use of nuclear power in the United States.  The Obama Administration has publicly voiced support for nuclear power in the past, and continues to do so even with the situation as it is in Japan.

However, I'm not sure I buy it.  My prediction is that the future of nuclear fission as an energy source in this country is effectively dead.  Environmentalists will make every effort to prevent any new plants and reactors from being built, and to shut down any existing reactors.  It's already happening as a quick search on your favorite search engine will tell you.  I predict that the administration will ultimately and "regretfully" decide that we really can't afford the risk and will cancel all of the new licenses that have been issued, will advocate shutting down any existing reactors if possible, and will refocus its efforts on promoting other, less feasible technologies like wind and solar.  I personally don't think Obama supports nuclear power at all but is only putting on the show of doing so to appease its supporters.  I think this crisis will be yet another that they won't let "go to waste" in order to further their agenda.

I hope I'm wrong, I really do.  We'll just have to wait and see whether or not I am.

A deplorable act

I agree with everything in the following press release from the Citizens' Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms:

CCRKBA DEPLORES AZ SHOOTING,
SUBSEQUENT EXPLOITATION

BELLEVUE, WA – The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is condemning Saturday’s attempted assassination of Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and the murders of six people including a federal judge and a 9-year-old child, for which a 22-year-old Tucson man is now facing charges.

“Our sincere sympathy and sorrow goes to the victims of this heinous crime, and their families, who are in our thoughts and prayers,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan M. Gottlieb. “This was a despicable act of cowardice, and we believe the full force of law should be used against the individual responsible.

“And speaking of despicable,” he continued, “we find it unconscionable that the gun prohibition lobby wasted no time at all in its attempt to exploit this hideous attack in an effort to further its political agenda. When will these people stop dancing in the blood of crime victims in an attempt to resuscitate their relevance?”

Gottlieb was especially critical of attempts by at least two different organizations to link an out-of-context remark made in 2009 by the National Rifle Association’s Wayne LaPierre to this crime. He called it a “shameless demonstration of the depths to which the anti-gun-rights lobby will stoop in an attempt to discredit gun rights organizations.

“We notice,” he said, “that little has been said about the courageous armed citizen, Joe Zamudio, who helped physically subdue the gunman. Despite Mr. Zamudio’s disclosure during interviews with CNN and Fox News that he was armed, the press appears to be largely ignoring this detail.

“The gun apparently used by the suspect, Jared Loughner, was quickly traced to a legal sale at a Tucson-area sporting goods store in November,” he added. “The speed by which that firearm was traced belies claims that police agencies are hindered by current statute that prohibits political exploitation of firearm trace data.

“A horrible crime has been committed, and our nation is stunned,” Gottlieb concluded. “But until this investigation is completed, it is disgusting that gun prohibitionists would rush to the nearest microphone, demanding that we need more laws, while trying to link firearms rights advocates to this tragedy.”

There is hope

In Egypt, something wonderful happened:

Egypt’s majority Muslim population stuck to its word Thursday night. What had been a promise of solidarity to the weary Coptic community, was honoured, when thousands of Muslims showed up at Coptic Christmas eve mass services in churches around the country and at candle light vigils held outside.

From the well-known to the unknown, Muslims had offered their bodies as “human shields” for last night’s mass, making a pledge to collectively fight the threat of Islamic militants and towards an Egypt free from sectarian strife.

“We either live together, or we die together,” was the sloganeering genius of Mohamed El-Sawy, a Muslim arts tycoon whose cultural centre distributed flyers at churches in Cairo Thursday night, and who has been credited with first floating the “human shield” idea.

Among those shields were movie stars Adel Imam and Yousra, popular preacher Amr Khaled, the two sons of President Hosni Mubarak, and thousands of citizens who have said they consider the attack one on Egypt as a whole.

“This is not about us and them,” said Dalia Mustafa, a student who attended mass at Virgin Mary Church on Maraashly. “We are one. This was an attack on Egypt as a whole, and I am standing with the Copts because the only way things will change in this country is if we come together.”

Got it in one

The quote of the day, from this article by John Hayward:

The assertion that some citizens have an unbreakable, arbitrary responsibility to provide sustenance for others is inherently hostile to the concept of liberty.  You are not “free” when the collective demands of favored citizens can place unlimited demands on the fruit of your labor.  A nation is not “free” when any class of its citizens faces such demands, no matter how badly outnumbered or politically unpopular they might be.

Go read it all.

Justice Breyer thinks banning guns is allowed under the Second Amendment

He's really stretching for this one:

If you look at the values and the historical record, you will see that the Founding Fathers never intended guns to go unregulated, Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer contended Sunday.

Appearing on "Fox News Sunday," Breyer said history stands with the dissenters in the court's decision to overturn a Washington, D.C., handgun ban in the 2008 case "D.C. v. Heller." 

Breyer wrote the dissent and was joined by Justices John Paul Stevens, David H. Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. He said historians would side with him in the case because they have concluded that Founding Father James Madison was more worried that the Constitution may not be ratified than he was about granting individuals the right to bear arms.

To Justice Breyer I would say two things:  First, regardless of what Madison actually thought, he was not the only founder and his is not the only opinion to value.   Second, even if you're right, you cannot reasonably extrapolate that Madison, let alone all of the Founders, would support an outright ban on personal firearms as effectively existed in Washington DC prior to the Heller ruling.

He goes on:

"If you're interested in history, and in this one history was important, then I think you do have to pay attention to the story," Breyer said. "If that was his motive historically, the dissenters were right. And I think more of the historians were with us."

That being the case, and particularly since the Founding Fathers did not foresee how modern day would change individual behavior, government bodies can impose regulations on guns, Breyer concluded.

Do you also agree, then, that "since the Founding Fathers did not forsee how modern day would change individual behavior" that government bodies can impose regulations on speech?  Of course not.  Some would say that this analogy is not valid, but throughout history governments have decreed that certain speech is just as dangerous as a gun.  Of course, first they took away the guns, then they took away the right to speech.  There's a lesson there, methinks.

Quote of the day

Via the Patriot Post.

"More troubling than WikiLeaks' latest revelation of US secrets ... is the Obama administration's weak, wrong-headed and erratic response. Unfortunately, the administration has acted consistently with its demonstrated unwillingness to assert and defend US interests across a wide range of threats, such as Iran and North Korea, which, ironically, the leaked cables amply document. ... His secretary of state does not comprehend that America is the subject of the attack, his department of defense is not interested in defending us, and the president himself seems utterly indifferent to the whole affair. All of this underscores the real problem. It is not WikiLeaks that ultimately imperils our national security, but the failing Obama administration, which ignores the nature and extent of threats we face, and which is too often unwilling to act to thwart them." --former UN ambassador John Bolton

A new record

It's been pretty cold lately here in the Seattle area.

As expected, the temperature dropped to 14 degrees early Wednesday at Sea-Tac Airport, breaking the old record of 16 from 1985.

KING 5 Meteorologist Rich Marriott said temperatures dipped to 9 degrees in Lynnwood, 7 degrees in Parkland and -8 in Ellensberg. Other reported temperatures included Bellingham 18, Tacoma 13, Olympia 16, Vancouver 19, Yakima -11, Moses Lake -17, Spokane -6, Pullman -1.

Al Gore, call your office, if you're willing to stick your head up at all.

TSA Humor

Ah, you *think* they're only jokes....

Via the Patriot Post.

Transportation Security Administration

Submitted

Submitted