The Greening of Nuclear Power
The title implies that nuclear power is becoming environmentally friendly - but what it means is that there has been a shift in thinking about nuclear power from the greenies. (Over generalization perhaps?) The editorial uses gaia hypothesis creator, James Lovelock, as the lithmus on this, as if to say, if Lovelock loves it, why can't the rest of y'all?
The editorial urges readers to give nuclear a "fresh look," since it promises to get us off of nasty fossil fuels and uranium is "abundant and inexpensive." The piece fails to mention anything about where uranium comes from, nor does it give a cost benefit analysis of our the other inexpensive and abundant power source, also known as our arch nemesis, coal.
It does give light to one negative aspect of nuclear - the controversy about where to put the waste long term - but aside from that, the Times editorial staff paints a fairly rosy picture of a future with nuclear power. So what are we waiting for?