...Not once, but twice in its short opinion writeup, WaPo‘s editorial board flippantly refers to nuclear power as “carbon-free.” This statement could not be further from the truth. A minor investigation on the part of WaPo‘s editorial team would have quickly revealed that this statement is outright nonsense — yet the publication’s editors chose to let it fly. But why?
From a investigative reporter’s point-of-view, it would be low-hanging fruit to discover, not only is nuclear energy not carbon-free, it is on the contrary carbon-intensive.
…Thus far, WaPo has issued no official correction or retraction. It did however choose to publish a very short letter to the editor criticizing the editorial, authored by Paki Wieland from Northampton, Massachusetts. The letter, titled, Plenty of carbon used in nuclear energy, reads:
The April 2 editorial “Nuclear energy in peril” referred to nuclear energy as carbon-free. It is not carbon-free.
If we look at nuclear power in whole, from the uranium mining to the dismantling of nuclear power plants, there is an extraordinary use of energy, from the initial devastation of the environment where the uranium is mined to the costly cleanup.
The impact on the environment continues through every phase of nuclear-energy production. A deep look into the issue of nuclear power would lead to overwhelming evidence to support ending nuclear power as a source of energy.
While it is good WaPo‘s opinion editors chose to publish this dissenting viewpoint, it is far from an official correction or retraction of the original piece. It is also the opinion of the EnviroNews Board that WaPo should make a correction or retract its editorial entirely…
more: EDITORIAL: The Washington Post Editorial Board's Epic Fail on 'Carbon-Free' Nuclear Power - EnviroNews | The Environmental News Specialists