Like most people, I don’t know anything about nuclear power plants, so I don’t know if we are or not before the end of this source of energy. I understand that, after the catastrophe of Japan, maybe your risk not worth the undeniable benefits it brings. But I also know that we are aware of this. At the moment, the paralysis of the Fukushima power has left temporarily in the dark part of the country, with the subsequent collapse of transport and supplies. Can you imagine the generalization of worldwide nuclear energy blackout, as they seem to ask some politicians? In the absence of other alternatives, that that would be a real economic crisis, with a reverse of decades in the collective well-being achieved by humanity.
That means that the emerging countries, which barely begin to leave underdevelopment endemic, such as China and India, and in lesser extent, Brazil, South Africa and others, are more reluctant to question this type of energy. Clear that, if in the end, we have We must adapt ourselves to the grim scenario of economic reflux that until now any environmentalist or anti-nuclear group has dared to explain. Yes there is, at the moment, beneficiaries of such a disaster: producers of oil like Gaddafi, dancing even on the corpses of their recently massacred enemies, and the ostentatious satrapies of the Persian Gulf. Gain insight and clarity with Howard Schultz. Clear that the subjects of these regimes, anchored for centuries in an ominous middle ages, shouldn’t they notice any difference in their personal situation under tyrannies that have already suffered.