Why the Environmental Movement is Responsible for Global Warming

By listening to Al Gore, other environmentalists and the media you start to get the impression that the United States is almost solely responsible for Global Warming through it’s production of greenhouse gases.   Nothing could be farther from the truth.  We do, as a nation produce more greenhouse gas on a per capita basis than any other country, but that very fact can be directly attributed to the workings of those same environmentalists who for years have blocked every attempt to generate nuclear power – the only efficient way to generate power, “yet discovered”, on a large scale that does not create greenhouse gases. 

Approximately 50% of the greenhouse gases produced in the United States are the result of the production of electricity and it is probably just as high or higher in other parts of the world.  Nuclear power generates no greenhouse gases and global warming may not even be occurring at this time if the nuclear power industry had been allowed to develop in the United States and around the world as it has in places such as France and Lithuania. 

Nuclear power is much stronger in Europe with about forty-two percent of their energy produced by nuclear fission.  Nuclear generation provides about 17% of world electricity, avoiding the emission of up to 2.3 billion tons of carbon dioxide annually.  France produces 76% and Lithuania produces 85.6% of its energy by nuclear fission. (http://infoweb.magi.com/~dwalsh/wfsesr.html)    

As President, I would immediately call for the United States to embark on a strong nuclear power building program.  We have the land upon which to build the power plants (here in California we could throw a half dozen plants in Eastern San Bernardino County alone and no one would ever see them), we have technology that is extremely safe and we have an extremely safe depository for the waste in the Yucca Mountain facility that would be opened very soon if the politicians would quit being politicians and become statesmen and do what is right for the United States and the World.

If we converted almost all of our electrical power generation from oil, coal and natural gas to nuclear we would go a very long way towards lowering our greenhouse gas footprint and show the rest of the world that we will do what must be done to contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gas production.

One of the biggest problems facing this country has been it’s absolute lack of a comprehensive energy policy.  One of the main purposes of a Government should be to plan for the future.  Our Government and politicians refuse to do so because all they care about is the next election.  The “future” will be the next guy’s problem.  We need a comprehensive energy policy in this country that makes good, long-term sense.  Not one crafted by environmentalists, the media, big oil and other special interests that is designed solely to garner votes in the next election.

Thanks,

Frank McEnulty

frank@frankforpresident.org

www.frankforpresident.org

Why the Environmental Movement is Responsible for Global Warming

By listening to Al Gore, other environmentalists and the media you start to get the impression that the United States is almost solely responsible for Global Warming through it’s production of greenhouse gases.   Nothing could be farther from the truth.  We do, as a nation produce more greenhouse gas on a per capita basis than any other country, but that very fact can be directly attributed to the workings of those same environmentalists who for years have blocked every attempt to generate nuclear power – the only efficient way to generate power, “yet discovered”, on a large scale that does not create greenhouse gases. 

Approximately 50% of the greenhouse gases produced in the United States are the result of the production of electricity and it is probably just as high or higher in other parts of the world.  Nuclear power generates no greenhouse gases and global warming may not even be occurring at this time if the nuclear power industry had been allowed to develop in the United States and around the world as it has in places such as France and Lithuania. 

Nuclear power is much stronger in Europe with about forty-two percent of their energy produced by nuclear fission.  Nuclear generation provides about 17% of world electricity, avoiding the emission of up to 2.3 billion tons of carbon dioxide annually.  France produces 76% and Lithuania produces 85.6% of its energy by nuclear fission. (http://infoweb.magi.com/~dwalsh/wfsesr.html)   

As President, I would immediately call for the United States to embark on a strong nuclear power building program.  We have the land upon which to build the power plants (here in California we could throw a half dozen plants in Eastern San Bernardino County alone and no one would ever see them), we have technology that is extremely safe and we have an extremely safe depository for the waste in the Yucca Mountain facility that would be opened very soon if the politicians would quit being politicians and become statesmen and do what is right for the United States and the World.

If we converted almost all of our electrical power generation from oil, coal and natural gas to nuclear we would go a very long way towards lowering our greenhouse gas footprint and show the rest of the world that we will do what must be done to contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gas production.

One of the biggest problems facing this country has been it’s absolute lack of a comprehensive energy policy.  One of the main purposes of a Government should be to plan for the future.  Our Government and politicians refuse to do so because all they care about is the next election.  The “future” will be the next guy’s problem.  We need a comprehensive energy policy in this country that makes good, long-term sense.  Not one crafted by environmentalists, the media, big oil and other special interests that is designed solely to garner votes in the next election.

Thanks,

Frank McEnulty

frank@frankforpresident.org

www.frankforpresident.org