Get Adobe Flash player

Staff Editorials

Yes to nuclear power

    It’s been hot this summer; Air conditioners running around the clock. We are accustomed to this convenience in America and you can be sure families in India and China, where it’s also really hot, are using their growing affluence to buy similar appliances.
    All this means more electricity must be generated around the world. Analysts project world energy demands could triple in the next 30 years. Across the south eastern United States, energy demand is expected to grow 27 percent by 2030, according to Georgia Power.
    New sources of large scale, reliable, affordable power that don’t destroy the planet are needed. Thus far the wind and solar industries have made small strides but nothing to meet the projected global demand.
    Where the world needs to look is nuclear. Overshadowed by public fears that are largely misinformed, and bogged down in engineering, cost and permitting strangleholds, nuclear energy still represents the best bet for powering our world with the fewest harmful side-effects of pollution and climate change gases.
    Georgia Power, who operates the Hatch and Vogtle nuclear plants here, says on their website, “Nuclear energy is the most cost-effective, reliable and environmentally responsible fuel source available today.”
    They would like to add two new units to their Vogtle operation on the Savannah River. Construction is underway (sort of). They are running months behind schedule on a project once hoped to be completed by 2020.The cost overruns are similarly a mess and Georgia Power customers have already footed the bills by paying rates now to fund future construction. The new reactors were once slated as a $14 billion project but are now projected to run closer to $22 billion, according to the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy.
    The problems of opening a nuclear plant aren’t unique to Georgia. These would actually be the first two new nuclear units to open anywhere in the United States in the past three decades.
    While this construction project is a lesson in frustration, the world needs nuclear to work. No other power source is likely to meet our needs without wrecking the climate. Once operational, nuclear is  solid and sustainable. It doesn’t require digging additional holes for raw materials, nor pipelines stretched across the countryside, nor does it give off greenhouse gases that cause climate change.
    There is a public perception that nuclear plants equal radiation problems. But the nuclear plant disasters aren’t nearly as disastrous as commonly thought.
    Consider first that nuclear power has a track record in 32 countries (including third world locations), with decades of service and there have been three major accidents of note, two of which didn’t cause any direct fatalities.
    The accidents occurred at Three Mile Island in the U.S. in 1979, where it is widely thought that no serious health effects occurred though there is a minority view that the radiation released was the cause of later problems.
    The next accident was in Chernobyl in 1986 where an explosion killed 31 and later deaths are also attributable. But bear in mind this was the Soviet Union where denial of any accident and little effort to clean up contributed to the dire effects.
    Finally, there was the Fukushima plant in Japan in 2011 where older reactors were damaged by a tsunami. Bad location was a prime factor, though the accident caused no fatalities at the time; it is projected that up to 650 people could die of related radiation issues in future  years.
    Consider also the long period of no construction in the U.S. has allowed the technology to get much better. Some of the later designs greatly ameliorate problems with the waste issues of older plants.
    The U.S. Regulatory Commission requires plants meet a “1 in 10,000 core damage frequency” but the plants operating today mostly meet a 1 in 1,000,000 standard and the new plants are engineered at 1 in 10 million.
    One in 10 million odds seem pretty acceptable considering the other option of more climate change, pollution, plus the uncertainty of outpacing world energy production are all troubling for the whole planet.
    We need a clear plan in this country to move nuclear power forward and it starts in Georgia with our government working to clear hurdles for the two plants underway.

Keep cool America

    One of the pundits/commentators on Sunday made a point that on the surface America should be content this summer -- unemployment is down, gas is relatively cheap and the economy is doing well, our military is not as fully-engaged in anything overseas as it has been for the past decade.
    But that is not the case, the word used by several columnists and commentators is that the recent shootings of both the black men by the police officers and the five officers by a sniper has caused an “unraveling.” The massive protests in Atlanta over police shootings has certainly shown that the nation is unsettled.
     At the heart of the domestic tension is a growing split between those who favor Black Lives Matter versus those who are for Blue (police) Lives Matters, as though you have to choose a side. This is where things get frightening when it becomes an us versus them standoff within our own borders.
    It should go without saying that both Black and Blue lives matter. Neither side should have to publicly express their desire to live without fear, but unfortunately that is not the case.
    It would be unimaginable what would happen to a community that couldn’t depend on their police force. They are the backbone of what keeps us safe in our homes and on our streets everyday and most people know this. Despite occasional nasty remarks, Americans of good character all recognize law enforcement officers are here to protect and serve.
    Which is not to say we should ever set anyone on a pedestal so high, their actions can’t be questioned. If the shootings in Baton Rouge and Minnesota are found to be to be criminal, the officers need to face what the law deems appropriate.
    In both cases, the preliminary information warrants further investigation and dialogue. And worse still, it is hard to keep  track of all the incidents where black men have died following routine encounters with the police. Recent statistics from a Harvard researcher shows blacks are actually no more likely to be killed than whites with police shootings but the same statistics  show a significantly higher rate of blacks being on the receiving end of non-lethal use of police force.
    In Dallas, what occurred seems painfully clear: A twisted angry black man  cowardly gunned down five police officers and wounded others who were protecting the people protesting police shootings.
    But let’s keep in mind that the shooting of the officers in Dallas is not the work of any organized movement, any more than the mass shooting last June, which left nine dead in a Charleston church, is representative of white southern movements.
    In Atlanta with more than 10,000 protestors on the streets, there have been very few arrests and mostly for people blocking roadways. People want to be heard and exercise their First Amendment rights peacefully.
    But as these events show, it just takes one nut or one bad/poorly trained policeman to “unravel” a nation.
    Part of this constant tension lying barely under the surface of modern America is fuelled by the rhetoric that comes in a never-ending cascade on social media and the airwaves. Expressing fear that the country is on the verge of a collapse or about to be taken over gives rise to extreme action and justifies outrageous acts.
    Political debate has always contained  grand hyperbole and calls for action, but it has never been so pervasive as it is today, reinforcing beliefs that the country is being destroyed and we need immediate action to save our republic.
    Looking at comments on news stories and social media, one wonders if our president were assassinated by domestic terrorists would it be universally condemned? Would there be gloating among some groups?
    When you have sick-minds and feed them a constant diet of the government/police-is-coming-to-get-you rhetoric, it’s no surprise someone finally snaps.
    Criticizing a government is fine and political firebrands a constant part of American history. But at the end of the day, we must be able to behave civilly towards each other.
    Elsewhere in this issue, you’ll find words of wisdom from a man turning 100 years old. He thought we should all “keep cool.” While he may have been referring to the weather, his advice resonants with the recent events in this country - let’s all be cool.

Living off the land

By Dan Pool
Editor
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

    I’ve been living off the land this summer, just like our ancestors, except of course I live in a subdivision where there is only one barn, but a couple of swimming pools – not exactly a farming settlement.
    Nevertheless I set out, just like Thoreau, to live simply this summer, enjoying the produce that would be the reward of my hard work in the garden. I talked big of how I was going to eat so healthy I would need gluten supplements to balance all the greens.
    All the self-reliance rhetoric sounded fine planting spring crops when you actually don’t have any option of eating your own produce.
    But my spring garden mainly chose to reward me with kale – lots and lots of kale, plus a few beets and some now bitter lettuce.
    Summer has been better with green beans by the bucket full, but unless tomatoes are supposed to have flat, blackened bottoms, something is a little off in my yard.
     Still I have made a game effort – sort of.
    The hunger set in after about three days. Turns out a normal human can eat healthily only so long before he’s sick of it – mentally. Kale smoothies in the morning, kale and bitter lettuce salad at lunch and sautéed kale in the evening is, frankly, more kale than anyone can take. It does stuff to you – in my case I turned to theft.
     Not proud here, but I began stealing food from other family members. In my case an all healthy, homegrown diet did cause me to shed a few pounds, but also to take food from children’s mouths.
    While I rhapsodized about the moral superiority of kale and squash diets, my wife and kids stuck to standard American food like pizza and stuff from the microwave.
    They had normal food – even leftover burgers and ice cream, which no amount of fertilizer would make my garden produce. So a little bite here and a little sample there and my resolve busted. Heck, they had shelves filled with good stuff and if you look at the big picture, the ingredients for Captain Crunch were grown in something like a garden, or maybe a factory, by people who were either good hard-working American farmers or would probably like to be Americans. So how bad could it be to sneak a bowl here and there?
    And the remnants of a Rocco’s burger might have gone to waste if I hadn’t secretly devoured it. Food waste is a real problem and I was doing my share to correct it.
     Finally, I abandoned any grand plan of living off the land, making excuses about how I WOULD eat my kale but “man I am running so late,  better just have some bacon and eggs this morning – whole lot quicker than picking my crops.”
    I can say I tried it and, according to historians, even Henry David Thoreau would leave Walden Pond to go eat at friends' homes. I have looked at the madness eating nothing but garden grown food produces and frankly didn’t much like what I saw or tasted.
    But as Scarlett O’Hara declared “as God as my witness, I will not be hungry again” as long as Ingles keeps selling Amstel Light, ice cream and potato chips.

Things that make you go hmm on the downtown planning

    At the recent packed-house discussion of Jasper downtown transportation, there was a lot of enthusiasm, which is good. But listening to the comments, some of this optimism over the process may have been geared towards unrealistic expectations.
    Not to dampen, but hopefully to constrain, some of the more exuberant ideas. Please consider the following:
    “The city is held back by a lack of vision.” This was the number one most commonly cited weakness that consultants Kimley-Horn uncovered. The consultant tried to soft-pedal it so that those who are writing the checks, Jasper City Hall, weren’t offended.
    But it is really not accurate. There is a vision for what people want: basically for us to have a downtown where nice shops stay open late with well-lit, tree-lined streets and there are plenty of stylish pedestrians window-shopping and very convenient parking. While we are at it, let’s throw in that is remains a perpetual 75 degrees with sunny skies year-round.
    There is no lack of vision for what is wanted, but it’s true there isn’t any clear cut path to reach that vision. So much depends on what the existing businesses do and who shows up in the future with ideas and capital for a venture in an empty space.
    Many people at the meeting argue as though it is a fundamental law that if Jasper winds up with the right signage, right width of sidewalks and a nice theme of street-lamps, the downtown will see business boom. We are not convinced this is a sure bet.
    In fact, a greatly improved streetscape along Main was accomplished years ago and did not produce a longterm growth trend in business. The sidewalks here are nice, the downtown monument at the north end, the grassy park on the south end, that there are trees (regardless of whether you like the current crop) all amount to an attractive streetscape for Main Street.
    Bear in mind, the minions for years cried out, “Oh if we could do something about that blue building, it would help all of Main Street.” Voila, blue building restored more grandly than anyone could have wished for and it’s sitting empty.   
    • One of the more interesting ideas presented at the meeting was to work on the two back streets which parallel Main Street.  This may not be that useful as those streets (Mark Whitfield/West Street on the west and East Street on the east) serve in many places as backdoors of the buildings fronting Main Street.
    But to totally contradict the above point, the expansion of the downtown area with new streetscapes and routing of traffic into  backstreets, the area behind the Methodist church, (not to mention creating “connectivity” to old the Piggly Wiggly area), is an ambitious plan that might bear fruit. Maybe if people see a lot more nicely connected space it will give a renewed confidence in bringing businesses to town. Maybe?           
    There were some simpler points from that meeting, we would like to second:
    • The need for a better entrance to Jasper on Highway 515. A few trees, nice signs, some flowers and people on the four-lane know they are somewhere when they reach the Highway 53 intersection.
    • A little attractive signage in downtown. How about something directing people to the courthouse and the parking for it?
    Let’s be hopeful that some solid small changes will result from the planning process. Maybe we’ll see some traffic improvements and some attractive signage.         And more importantly this will allow our vision of a thriving downtown to result. But let’s keep in mind that neither Rome nor an improved Jasper will be built in a day.

Political nastiness also an American tradition

    With July 4th approaching, we will see our nation’s founding recalled fondly. The Founding Fathers are perhaps the greatest collection of thinkers, philosophers, and statesmen ever assembled in one place and at one time. The ones who served as early presidents - George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, James Madison - were all geniuses who set our nation’s course.
    Even those who never rose to the top ranks - Alexander Hamilton, Ben Franklin, Thomas Paine and Samuel Adams - are a collection of minds unparalleled in history. Though they came from widely different backgrounds, the foresight of that group assembled in one place, the American colonies, and at one point in history, 1770s-1790s, is simply unimaginable.
    Critics of modern politics are quick to point out how far we have fallen and they are largely correct; Gone are the vision and lofty ideals.
    But like most everything else, the founding fathers’ political infights were also bigger, tougher and more vibrant than the modern equivalents.   
    Those who say that the founding fathers would not engage in the same political rhetoric and divisiveness we see with the parties today simply don’t know their history.   
    Reading the recent biographies of John Adams and Alexander Hamilton one quickly realizes political infighting and partisanship dates back to our nation’s founding – or at least to Washington’s second term. Though they didn’t have organized political parties, the key players then were either Federalists or Republicans and these groups truly thought the other was out to destroy the country in a much more robust manner than Clinton and Trump lob allegations back and forth.
    Secretary of State Jefferson and Madison (in Congress) openly speculated about whether Treasury Secretary Hamilton had hidden aims to restore a monarchy.
    Hamilton faced an investigation by congress on charges of personal profiteering and giving insider information from the treasury. He was never found guilty, but the tradition of constant calls for scrutiny as a political tool was established early.
    The rhetoric was just as nasty as anything today. When Hamilton and his wife both came down with yellow fever, Jefferson, among others, questioned whether he might be faking it and also that he was of weak constitution so it was no surprise he claimed an illness.
    Washington, possibly the greatest of the founders, did his best to keep the lid on his cabinet, but infighting during his second term ran amuck. Eventually, Jefferson resigned over the split between his Republican allies and Hamilton’s Federalists.
    The goal in pointing out the unseemly side of early politics is not to tarnish the founders, but rather to correct the Disney Prince notion that our Founding Fathers were all on the same page and worked together. They didn’t. The brawls in that day were bare knuckle and at least one involved a shooting.
    The reason for their fighting then is the same as it is today – smart people have different views of how something as large and complex as our nation should be run and when they collide, it’s no holds barred. When fighting for deeply held beliefs, politicians in all eras justify a lot of means to achieve their ends.
    Recall that it was the conflict and the compromises that forged the nation -- not  unanimous belief among founders. The Bill of Rights was added as a political concession to get the Constitution passed and it took closed-door sessions, back room deals and all kinds of promises get the colonies to move from the loose alliance under the Articles of Confederation to a United States.
    So, as we celebrate our nation’s independence, bear in mind the political brawls today are meek compared to the days when Aaron Burr (a one-time Vice President) shot and killed Alexander Hamilton (the founding treasury secretary). Now that was a political divide.