This morning I received an email from Greenpeace with a request for me to contact my Congressmen about cutting the $36 Billion taxpayers give away to the nuclear power industries. The email sent looked like this:
"The news from Japan about the nuclear power plant in Fukushima is a terrible reminder of the fact that nuclear energy is inherently dangerous.I added an additional line: "And to that I would add that the top priority is to see that all spent fuel is safely and permanently stored."
Wall Street refuses to invest in nuclear energy because they know the risks. As a taxpayer, I don't want to invest in nuclear energy either.
I strongly urge you to cut the $36 billion in loan guarantees to the nuclear industry from the proposed budget for next year.
Now is the time to invest in technology that uses clean and unlimited energy sources like the sun and wind. Not risky and dangerous nuclear power."
I thought you might be interested in the two replies I received back. If you think about it, you really have to love this Internet enabled world we live in. Some have honed this skill better than others.
From Senator Roy Blunt I received this email reply:
Dear Anna:
Thank you for contacting me on renewable energy.
While I agree we should expand our use of renewable energy sources, we can't hamper our nation's access to cost-efficient and reliable energy to get there. Renewable energy requires costly subsidies to be viable. While the wind and sun are free, what it takes to turn them into electricity is not. That's why now is not the time for Congress to enact legislation mandating a nationwide renewable electricity standard, the result of which would saddle consumers with higher electricity costs.
I believe we must look at all types of energy sources, and increase the production of domestic energy in an environmentally-sound manner. Americans would be better served pursuing all forms of clean energy development rather than implementing burdensome mandates. Clean energy, such as nuclear, clean-coal, wind, solar, and biomass, will play an important part in our energy future.
Again, thank you for contacting me. I look forward to continuing our conversation on Facebook (www.facebook.com/SenatorBluntSincere regards,
Roy Blunt
United States Senator
And from Congressman Todd Akin this email made its way to me:
Thank you for contacting my office. If you are a resident of the 2nd district and you requested a reply, I will get back with you as soon as possible. However, when my office receives a particularly high volume of correspondence, response times may be much longer than typical. Thank you for your patience as we seek to answer your message.
If your email concerned a tour request or flag request, please complete the appropriate form on my website. If you need help in dealing with a federal agency, please review the Constituent Service section on my website and contact the caseworker in my District office. To submit a scheduling request, contact the scheduler in my DC office at 202-225-2561 or submit your request through my website.
You can stay up-to-date on the latest issues by subscribing to my email newsletter, the AKIN ALERT. Request your subscription at: http://akin.house.gov/.
Sincerely,
W. Todd Akin
www.akin.house.gov
While I don't agree with some of the remarks made by Senator Blunt, kudos to him for utilizing today's technology and being able to reply to 'high volume correspondence'.
I am beginning to get the Republican message - first and foremost as Sen. Blunt said "we can't hamper our nation's access to cost-efficient and reliable energy to get there" or as a local state senator put it more succinctly "cheap and abundant".
Off subject footnote: If you are interested here are links to Open Secrets.Org showing where the campaign contributions come from for these two gentlemen.
Senator Roy Blunt http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=2012&cid=n00005195&type=I
Congressman Todd Akin http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=2012&cid=n00009677&type=I
I love him saying he's for clean energy, and then including nuclear in the group. What could be dirtier than spent fuel? It's amazingly blind to say that nuclear power is "clean". Shows a lack of understanding of the topic itself. And yet I hear this all the time.
ReplyDelete