Some environmentalists contend that building nuclear power plantsis useful for curbing global heating. I think they have been taken in.The article does not make it clear whether they are disputing aboutexisting nuclear reactors or building new one. But that distinctionis crucial.A nuclear reactor takes many years to build and is very expensive. Ifthe aim is to curb global heating, that is an ineffective method.A nuclear reactor is also vulnerable in wartime. It is, in effect, apreexploded nuclear bomb, as regards fallout. Installing one more ismaking extra vulnerability. At the end of its life, it will requireexpensive and slow decommissioning.However, for an existing reactor, the price of construction hasalready been paid, the construction time has already elapsed, thefallout is already there, and the cost of decommissioning is alreadygoing to have to be paid. If you can ensure that the reactor ismaintained so that it won't fail, maybe it is better to keep it running. The US has a history of letting flaws and damage slide.