Good Magazine’s Ben Goldhirsh and Jesse Jenkins of The Breakthrough Institute talk about America’s deadly energy addictions.

 

MSNBC TRANSCRIPT:

>>> we launch our final steel on wheels tour this wednesday with an issue that could not be more timely, our nation’s energy crisis. the spike in oil prices accompanying the mideast revolutions has sparked renewed interest in alternative and any domestic fuel source, not to mention the japan nuclear emergency which has prompted many of us to take a look at the outdated nuclear technology in use in our own country. for all the fears surrounding something like nuclear, experts say the truly dangerous energy source is the one we’ve been relying on for centuries — coal. coal mining has killed far more people than nuclear energy ever has, not to mention the harm it does once it entering the environment. global warming, anyone? ben goldhersh is here to help us answer the question, is coal really good for america? you were digging, ben. what did you find?

>> what’s important here is contextu contextualizing what we saw in fukushima, what’s the right response in the short and long term. and understanding when you look at danger per terawatt generated, how does nuclear stack up against coal and the other energy sources coming to the surface. i don’t want to state a definitive position on what’s the right direction. but we want to arrive at a portfolio that makes sense economically and makes sense against the needs that we have now and going forward.

>> i want jesse jenkins to join us in this conversation. he is the director of the breakthrough institute. can you paint a clear picture of the relative risks of something like coal compared to nuclear?

>> yeah. despite all the potent fears about nuclear power, if you look at any objective terms, there are several orders of magnitude difference between the risks posed by nuclear power and the much greater risk posed by coal or oil which provide the bulk of our energy today.

>> how do you measure that?

>> if you look at the public health impacts, the premature deaths, years of lives lost, there’s very estimates and methodologies may differ. but each one shows the relative impact on public health on the lives lost due to our consumption of coal far outstrip our — the dangers due to our consumption of nuclear power. that includes risks of major dents like the one at the chernobyl site or less disastrous accident occurring now in fukushima.

>> last year, nuclear had all sorts of momentum as the filthiness of all the other energy source came up. the most obvious, the bp oil spill. do you get any sense of how much of a decelebration there’s been in nuclear?

>> it’s a deceleration in my mind. i think the conversation at the political level and economic level is taking a big hit. last year, it felt like people were depending on nuclear to play a critical role in that portfolio. i’m not sure if that same energy is there now. be interesting to hear — jesse, you’re more in the field — to see if you’re seeing that same thing?

>> in the united states, we’re going to be taking a much closer look at nuclear power. but there are only a couple of plans on the drawing board for a future nuclear power plant in the united states. in countries like japan, domestic supplies of fossil fuels are quite limited. it’s going to be difficult to power the full size of their economy without either an existing or expanding role for nuclear power in their energy mix. places like china, india, japan and elsewhere.

>> listen, i guess my last point, ben, if you want to get into what’s good for america, whether it’s coal, nuclear or anything else, is how incredibly inefficient we are as a country in the way we burn lots of coal, run nuclear plants, hydro and everything else. and yet we only capture 35% — 35%, ben, japan captured 90%. germany captures 85%. what are we doing here? we just burn this for the hoot of it. might as well rip a hole in the attic and just light a fire.

>> it seems each week whether it’s education or energy, we’re talking about efficiency. and i think our country has leaps and bounds in terms of progress we can make on that front. but there are a lot of brilliant people who are working in all the different areas trying to close that gap.

>> listen, you two are surely good for america, at least in my opinion if i’m allowed to authorize such an opinion. do you have a grademark on the game “good” by the way, ben.

>> as much as we can hold.

>> you can’t sue me for saying i think you’re good for america?

>> it’s a weak trademark.

>> thank you both so much.