Clearly the environmental messages of these two pages are conflicting.
As a result of the 625,000 cubic meters of radioactive solid waste and the 200 square miles of polluted ground water, the people of Richland, Wash., face a very real threat of water contamination. One then asks: "Why would the citizens of Richland really be concerned about nuclear power for cleaner air?"
This promotion for nuclear power by the US Council for Energy Awareness is most likely linked to the fact that the Bush Administration wants to build 100 new nuclear power plants as well as continue operation of existing plants which may be unsafe. This means approximately $400 billion will be spent for nuclear technology that creates waste which no one really knows how to dispose of safely, not forgetting nuclear technology has historically proven to be unsafe and environmentally disastrous.
The energy industries, the Bush administration, and the US Council for Energy Awareness, all need to understand and act in response to environmental issues, rather than use them as misleading propaganda for an energy policy lacking technical, environmental, and economic feasibility. Richard Hofmeister II, Scottsdale, Ariz.
Letters are welcome. Only a selection can be published, subject to condensation, and none acknowledged. Please address them to "Readers Write," One Norway St., Boston, MA 02115.