I’m starting to see a concerning trend from certain southern-states, such as Texas, Florida and now Georgia that make a bold claim that nuclear power is considered a “green, and sustainable energy source.” There are so many levels of wrong to this that I feel the need to point them out and provide some sort of compass to help non-industry people become aware of just how badly this attempt is meant to misinform the American people.

The most recent article I can point to is this one, by the Huffington Post. In this article, author Christine Todd Whitman states:

“With plans in place in Georgia for the construction of the next generation of nuclear energy facilities, this industry expansion will promote economic prosperity and continued development of a sustainable clean energy source.”

Mrs. Whitman is known for being a former Governor of New Jersey and is also a co-founder of the Clean and Safe Energy Coalition, which is a group dedicated to “spreading the word” that nuclear is a clean and safe technology.

Let’s just start off with the facts. Nuclear power is inherently not safe. Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, Rancho Seco, and Fukushima are all examples of how nuclear power can cause significant threat to public safety when improperly handled or when disasters occur. Can anyone name an example of an entire city being evacuated by a coal, natural gas, wind, or solar power plant going haywire? …Ever?

Now, as for nuclear power being “sustainable,” that’s just flat out incorrect. Nuclear fuel exists in the forms of radioactive heavy metals that are only formed in the violent explosion of a supernova star. All of the radioactive material that exists on earth has been on this planet since the original formation of the solar system. With the exception of the occasional meteorite, there is no way at all to obtain more radioactive material…at all. Radioactive material is also the only fuel that is continually “burning away” and diminishing over time, whether we use it for electricity or not.

Since the definition of sustainable is the ability to maintain something at a certain rate or level, then I must point out that nuclear material in no way matches the definition of this word. If the definition of safe is to be protected from or not exposed to danger or risk, then I also must point out that nuclear power has a history of proving to also not match this definition.

What Mrs. Whitman and her organization are doing is providing misleading and incorrect information to the public for the sole gain of a few businessmen, invested in the industry of maintaining and distributing uranium at extremely high prices.

The Clean and Safe Energy Coalition claims that creating nuclear plants in the US will “bring jobs into Georgia,” but I really urge caution to anyone believing their rhetoric. Nuclear power plants can’t just be created by anyone. They are highly volatile and complicated structures that have thousands of moving parts involved, at temperatures and pressures far beyond anything a typical construction worker can comprehend. There will never be a single “blue collar, anyone can walk up and help out” type of job created by the installation of these plants, because all of the work must be done by specialists, and they’re already all lined up to start bidding on these projects. In reality, these “jobs” will hire specialized construction workers from around the globe to come in, build the plant, then leave.

This kind of misinformation and intentional deception under the guise of “being part of the green movement” is despicable at best, and undermines the credibility of the rest of us professionals in this field as well. We should all work to point out people and organizations such as this and alert non-industry professionals as to the dangers of “greenwashing.”