Dear Editor (of the strib),
You've printed some factually incorrect material in William Blazar's Keep nuclear power in state's energy portfolio. He argues that Minnesota should continue using nuclear power because 'nuclear plants have no air emissions'. I wonder where Blazar thinks the uranium that powers nuclear plants comes from? In fact, uranium ore requires extensive mining operations, refinement and transportation, all of which consume plenty of fossil fuels and produce their share of air and water pollution.

Blazar's further claims that nuclear power is 'efficient' and 'cheap', and that a permanent storage facility is 'on the way', are also far from clear. He ignores the issues of nuclear weapons proliferation and vulnerability to terrorist attack, both of which have profound consequences for our state's safety. As vice president of our state's Chamber of Commerce, Blazar should be ashamed to have delivered such an inaccurate and one-sided argument.

( in response to http://www.startribune.com/stories/1519/3858257.html )
[/rant]