- The Washington Times - Friday, September 4, 2009


What the climate legislation passed by the House in June is doing, by causing CO2-producing energy sources to cost more through a carbon tax, is allowing the market to reflect the real cost of producing electricity from fossil fuels (“Nuclear power plants face big profits in House bill,” Page 1, Tuesday).

We should pay the true costs for fossil-fuel energy sources, including all associated environmental costs, and not simply those needed to extract coal from the ground and burn it. The climate bill should give us a more level playing field with regard to energy sources, allowing those with reduced atmospheric pollution, including wind, nuclear and other alternatives, to compete in the market. If nuclear energy ends up making more profit as a result, more companies likely will take the risk to reinvest in it.


Adjunct professor, Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department

Associate director, Center for Energy Science and Technology Advanced Research

University of California at Los Angeles

Los Angeles

Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times is switching its third-party commenting system from Disqus to Spot.IM. You will need to either create an account with Spot.im or if you wish to use your Disqus account look under the Conversation for the link "Have a Disqus Account?". Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide