Changes

An environmentalist's ideal energy is one that emits no greenhouse gasses and is efficient. Nuclear energy is not only competitive with coal energy, but by an environmentalist standards, "cleaner." Environmentalists claim that they want the cleanest, most efficient energy source, but despise domestic nuclear energy use while at the same time ardently support Iran obtaining nuclear energy. This negates any validity they had towards nuclear energy being unsafe. H.R. 391 <ref>http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h391/show</ref> would amend the Clean Air Act of 1963 <ref>http://www.epa.gov/air/caa/</ref> to not allow congress to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. This would make the energy industry more competitive. As all free market economists know, the product of competition is lower prices at better quality, ultimately benefiting the American people the most.

An environmentalist's ideal energy is one that emits no greenhouse gasses and is efficient. Nuclear energy is not only competitive with coal energy, but by an environmentalist standards, "cleaner." Environmentalists claim that they want the cleanest, most efficient energy source, but despise domestic nuclear energy use while at the same time ardently support Iran obtaining nuclear energy. This negates any validity they had towards nuclear energy being unsafe. H.R. 391 <ref>http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h391/show</ref> would amend the Clean Air Act of 1963 <ref>http://www.epa.gov/air/caa/</ref> to not allow congress to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. This would make the energy industry more competitive. As all free market economists know, the product of competition is lower prices at better quality, ultimately benefiting the American people the most.

The argument has been put forth that the US and other countries should replace nuclear power production with presumably safer "renewable" power sources (i.e. wind and solar power); however, nuclear power is in general very safe and these alternative power sources fail to provide baseload power. Thus, the elimination of nuclear power, in addition to eliminating a clear power source, will likely cause massive problems in the electrical infrastructure of these countries and potentially the US if the current sentiment regarding nuclear power in the US does not change.  

Recently, many liberal American politicians have recently renewed their efforts to scale back nuclear power in the US; liberal pundits have similarly pushed for the elimination of nuclear power in the US despite the lack of greenhouse gas output from this power source. Several nations (e.g. Germany) have set down plans to entirely eliminate nuclear power in the coming decades. The argument has been put forth that the US and other countries should replace nuclear power production with presumably safer "renewable" power sources (i.e. wind and solar power); however, nuclear power is in general very safe and these alternative power sources fail to provide baseload power. Thus, the elimination of nuclear power, in addition to eliminating a clear power source, will likely cause massive problems in the electrical infrastructure of these countries and potentially the US if the current sentiment regarding nuclear power in the US does not change.