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.
Thomas Cochran has been working with the Natural Resources Defense Council since the 1970s to stop the use of nuclear power, particularly the kind that uses most of the potential energy and produces the lease amount of radioactive waste. This article shows his position in 2006. It would put the world back in the state it was in before there was plentiful nuclear energy. So many saviors would have the world using the least energy dense sources for electric power, transportation, industrial processes, heating and air conditioning. Too many nuclear energy professionals and most nuclear energy organizations are not sufficiently involved in the effort to have the public understand the tremendous benefits and the actual very low risks of nuclear energy. Fear mongering and simple statements sells well with the public.
Ted Nordhaus & Michael Shellenberger - Nuclear energy today is broadly recognized by scientists, scholars, and analysts as an environmentally positive technology with risks, such as they are, overwhelmingly outweighed by its environmental benefits. Such is the consensus on this question that mainstream environmental leaders no longer attempt to contest it.