Thomas Cochran has been working with the Natural Resources Defense Council since the 1970s to impede the use of nuclear power, particularly the kind that uses most of the potential energy and produces the lease amount of radioactive waste: In his 1977 testimony to Congress, he makes several assertions against advanced nuclear power: 1) The risks of making massive investments in a plutonium-based energy technology, 2) The misplaced energy priorities characterized by an excessive emphasis on commercialization of the LMFBR technology, neglect of energy conservation potential and under funding of alternative non-nuclear supply technologies.
Charles Barton, lead advocate for advanced nuclear power technologies, in particular from thorium: Thomas B. Cochran is a lobbyist employed by the Natural Resources Defense Council, to attack nuclear power on a full time basis. As befits a Lobbyist, Cochran is well compensated. In 2006 Cochran was one of the 5 highest paid employees of the NRDC, with a total compensation package approaching $200,000. In 2006 the largest single foundation donor to the the NRDF was the Energy Foundation, an environmental funding NGO, that also funds many other anti-nuclear "environmental organizations.
John Shanahan, civil engineer, President of Environmentalists for Nuclear - USA: Denver, Colorado, USA has experienced 70 to 80 degree temperature changes in two days. This weather pattern along with blizzards, floods and hurricanes in other parts of the world cause the poor and homeless to suffer and die and livestock to perish. Which is most important for the world to deal with: extreme weather, natural climate change, man-made climate change? Should nuclear energy experts be focusing on man-made climate change or on existence threatening problems in government, industry and public thinking? This presents all sides so you can decide.
John Shanahan, civil engineer: Nuclear power in the United States has not successfully responded to misleading and false information by anti-nuclear organizations since the 1970s. It has not successfully dealt with serious problems within the industry and regulatory agencies. Instead some pro-nuclear organizations focus on criticizing fossil fuels and supporting alarmist's claims that carbon dioxide from fossil fuels is an existential problem. Carbon dioxide from fossil fuels is not an existential threat to Earth's climate. Articles on all sides of the carbon dioxide topic are presented on this website under the main tab, ENVIRONMENT. The website for the Nuclear Matters Coalition has a main tab: CLIMATE. If Nuclear Matters is going to successfully get nuclear power on the right track, it might take their CLIMATE tab down and follow the suggestions presented in this article. The rest of the nuclear industry in the USA as well.