Opinion
Time to plant
Environmentalism needs action, not hype
Almost two years ago, President Bushed announced his
“America the Beautiful program,” under which volun
teers were to plant 1 billion trees a year for the next
decade. So far, it has been nothing but a beautiful public
relations opportunity.
Not a single tree has been
planted. The National Tree
Trust, the foundation that is to
oversee the program, proposed a
budget of more than $1 million
for salaries, fringe benefits,
travel and office expenses.
' Grants to tree-planting groups
were to amount to just $350,000
under the budget proposal sub
mitted to a House committee.
Some of the blame for the lack
of results must go to Congress.
, Last year it only approved $20
million for the program; Bush
requested $175 million.
But if the proposal submitted
to Congress is any indication,
much of the $175 million would
not have gone toward planting
trees.
The tree-planting embarrass
ment is symbolic of the admini
stration’s larger failure on
Lisa PytiiK/DN environmental issues, which has
consisted of more opportunistic posing than sound policy.
_F F p
ASUN regresses
Supporting ROTC creates setback
Once again the Association of Students of the University
of Nebraska senate has proved that it’s a good thing it
has no binding power.
Otherwise its vote Wednesday night in support of keeping
the ROTC program on campus could have been a setback to the
efforts of gay and lesbian students to end discrimination.
As it is, however, the Academic Senate — at whom the
ASUN vote was directed — can and should dismiss the resolu
tion that calls for the faculty body to soften its stance against
discrimination by the military.
Defense Department policy bars gays and lesbians from
service in the armed forces. Gay and lesbian students arc not
allowed to participate in ROTC for that reason.
Enough has been said about that antiquated and discrimina
tory policy. It doesn’t need to be repeated.
The Academic Senate last year took a progressive stance
against the Defense Department, by calling for the chancellor
to renegotiate the ROTC contract with the university if the
policy is not changed by 1993.
Wednesday night ASUN slapped the Defense Department on
the wrist for its policy but asked the Academic Senate to
revoke the part of the resolution that calls for renegotiation of
the contract.
Several senators, trying to shield their consciences with their
constituents, argued that they were standing up for the rights of
students with their vote to accept discrimination.
If the senators were really concerned with such altruistic
goals, they would have voted down the resolution. Now the
Academic Senate has no choice but to disregard ASUN’s
action.
— E.F.P.
What others think
Money answer to every North question
In an amazing turnabout, Li. Col.
Oliver North, point man for the Iran
contra initiative, decided to blow the
whistle on Ronald Reagan in his star
tling new book “Under Fire.”
In the final analysis, one must
wonder why Oliver North didn’t come
forward sooner if he felt as personally
betrayed by Ronald Reagan as he
claims. He testified to Congress un
der immunity; his testimony could
not have been used against him. So
why did Norlh choose to dutifully
protect his president, wait five years
and then lob this bombshell right back
in the Great Obfuscator’s face? As
those hardcovers start disappearing
from the shelves at a rate Kilty Kelley
would be proud of, we’ll bet Oliver
North could give us several million
reasons why — in small, unmarked
bills.
— The Minnesota Daily
University of Minnesota
"TOE. PRtCcfcPRWJO SAME. PREPARATIONS OP TPREE. UHU SM«v*T9 •.
' VI
CHRIS POTTER
Fear of nuclear power illogical
Despite scientific, public and
international outcry, the U.S.
government continues to pur
sue a reckless energy policy that can
end only in disaster. Research fund
ing for alternative fuel sources has
been cut by half over the last decade.
If this country is to provide itself
with a clean and sustained energy
supply, Congress and the president
should resume substantial funding of
wind, solar and hydrodynamic re
search. Above all, they must resume
and expand funding for nuclear re
search.
The United Slates bums fossil fuels
to provide more than 70 percent of its
electrical energy. Its factories and
automobiles choke the environment
by belching up each year millions of
tons of sulphur oxides, nitrogen ox
ides, hydrocarbons and soot.
Worse yet, the heavy dependence
on foreign oil constrains U.S. foreign
policy. Oil-rich Mideast countries hold
policy-makers hostage to endemic
religious and political strife. Though
its solidarity has been shattered tem
porarily, the Organization of Petro
leum Exporting Countries may reu
nite and induce another energy crisis.
A combination of media irrespon
sibility, environmental group pres
sure and public ignorance has dealt a
near critical blow to the most viable
energy option available.
Nuclear power might have devel
oped into a decidedly safe technology
with continued funding and decisive
political leadership. Instead it lan
guishes today near extinction.
Much of the ill will against nuclear
power in the United Stale began in
1979 when the Three Mile Island
reactor overheated and ejected a dose
of radioactive gas into the atmos
phere. Despite the fact that the amount
of radiation was small and the reac
tor’s safety containment design actu
ally worked, the media scared the
public witless. Since then, public
support for nuclear power has evapo
rated. ^
In lieu of sound
debate over the rela
tive menls. oL nuclear
power, the public, has
succumbed to an ir
rational and para
noid tear of anything.
au£km
Testing revealed that the average
radiation exposure to people near Three
Mile Island was only around 8 milli
rems. Tanning lamp visitors get more.
Nuclear power critics fell them
selves vindicated when in 1986 a far
more serious incident took place at
Chernobyl in the Soviet Union. Rather
than merely overheating, that reactor
actually experienced a meltdown.
Because the plant did not have the
safely containment structure that Three
Mile Island and all U.S. plants have,
the radiation threat was acute. Expo
sure estimates for people near Cher
nobyl range into the hundreds of rems
— around 10,000 limes more than
Three Mile Island.
But Chernobyl is hardly a vindica
tion of the anti-nuclear lobby. It is a
severe indictment of poor design,
shoddy workmanship and lax opera
tion procedures.
In lieu of sound debate over the
relative merits of nuclear power, the
public has succumbed to an irrational
and paranoid fear of anything nu
clear. Many erroneously associate
nuclear power with nuclear weapons,
unaware that a nuclear warhead is a
totally different piece of engineering.
Others cite the radiation danger as
a modem equivalent of medieval
demonic spirits. The mere mention of
radiation, regardless of its dosage, is
sufficient to scare off otherwise intel
ligent energy consumers.
Radiation in high doses is defi
nitely dangerous. Although nobody
died at Three Mile Island, 31 have
died at Chernobyl. Those deaths appear
inordinately sinister because they were
due to radiation.
But fossil fuels have been far more
dangerous. In the period from 1951 to
1970, nearly 7,000 people died in
coal mining accidents alone. Not a
single person died in U.S. nuclear
power plant accidents.
Since Three Mile Island, no new
nuclear plants have been built in this
country. But even with decreased
governmental research funding, nu
clear engineers have designed a number
of safer and cleaner reactors. Gav
coolcd and passive reactors, for ex
ample, improve enormously on the
basic design in use today.
Environmentalists charge that
radioactive waste makes nuclear power
unacceptable. But advanced breeder
reactors recycle their waste back into
fuel. Fusion reactors, though now'
technically unfeasible, may one day
with sufficient research funding op
erate with no radioactive waste what
soever.
Even ardent proponents of solar
and wind energy admit that these
options are currently economically
unfeasible. With adequate funding they
may one day be. In the meantime,
nuclear power is the safest way to
reduce our foreign oil dependency
and protect the environment simulta
neously.
Potter is a senior physics, philosophy,
math and history major and a Dally Nebras
kan columnist.
Signed staff editorials represent
the official policy of the Fall 1991
Daily Nebraskan. Policy is set by the
Daily Nebraskan Editorial Board. Its
members are; Jana Pedersen, editor;
Eric Pfanner, editorial page editor;
Diane Bray ton, managing editor;
Walter Gholson, columnist; Paul
EDITORIAL POLICY
uomcicr, copy desk chief; Brian
Shellito, cartoonist; Jeremy Fitzpa
trick, senior reporter.
Editorials do not necessarily re
flect the views of the university, its
employees, the students or the NU
Board of Regents.
The Daily Nebraskan’s publishers
are the regents, who established tnc
UNL Publications Board to super
vise the daily production of the pa
per.
According to policy set by the re
gents, responsibility for the editorial
content of the newspaper lies solely
in the hands of its students.
