Nuclear Power continued from page 6

…in property damage alone. Under the current limits, victims of nuclear accidents would recover only $.03 per dollar lost.

Opponents of the Nuclear Initiative argue that insurance companies refuse to insure nuclear power plants against a potential $17 billion disaster. Backers of the Initiative ask: If nuclear plants are as safe as the industry claims, why won't anyone insure them?

Finally, Proposition 15 requires that the Governor publish and update annually evacuation plans, so people living near nuclear plants can anticipate how to react in the event of an accident. Nuclear industry officials charge that this provision is a "scare tactic." But supporters of Proposition 15 point to the case of the Enrico Fermi breeder reactor, located 30 miles south of Detroit, which carne within a hair's breadth of a catastrophic accident on October 5, 1966. Officials faced the unnerving prospect of ordering the evacuation of two million persons from the Detroit area without any plan for how to accomplish this. The evacuation was never ordered because officials felt it would cause panic in the unprepared population. The Fermi plant was permanently closed in 1973.

GRASS ROOTS VS. BIG BUCKS

Proposition 15 is supported largely by environmental and community groups and individuals. Funds have been raised in small contributions, rarely larger than $1000, with most contributions under $100. Funds have also been raised through benefit rock concerts. A recent concert in Sacramento featured Jackson Browne and Linda Ronstadi. As of May 3, supporters of the Nuclear Initiative had raised about $450,000.

The "No on 15" campaign, known as "'Citizens for Jobs and Energy", is supported primarily by utility corporal ions like Pacific Gas and Electric and nuclear industry firms like Westinghouse and the San Francisco-based Bechtel Corp. As of May 3, the anti-15 campaign had amassed $1.5 million, and informed observers expect this figure to grow much larger by June 8.

The anti-15 campaign was boosted significantly in April when the California Supreme Court struck down all spending limits for proposition campaigns as a violation of freedom of speech. In the wake of this decision, the anti-15 forces are expected to mount a costly, saturation television campaign to defeat the Nuclear Initiative. Many out-of-state Utilities and nuclear-tied corporations are contributing to Citizens for Jobs and Energy, hoping that a nuclear power victory in California will thwart similar initiatives elsewhere.

While the spending limits were in effect, many observers predicted a close race. But, since the spending limits have been lifted, informed observers now believe that Proposition 15 will be defeated by about 60 per cent to 40 per cent.

“Citizens for Jobs and Energy" was created by a professional campaign firm, Winner-Wagner & Assoc., for a $35,000 fee. As the campaign name implies, pro-nuclear forces equate the growth of nuclear power with more jobs and abundant energy. Anti-15 publicity is stressing the theme. "Nuclear power means more jobs." Although that notion is hotly contested, a massive television campaign around that theme is bound to have a significant impact in a state where unemployment has been a major problem for several years.

Many energy experts argue that an alternative energy industry based on solar, wind and tidal power would create as many, if not more jobs than the heavily capital-intensive nuclear power industry. Furthermore, the California Energy Resources Conservation and development Commission recently revealed that California is not consuming as much energy as the Utilities have predicted. Currently, the United States consumes twice as much energy per capita as equally technological West Germany. Supporters of Proposition 15 believe that conservation would eliminate much of the energy consumption spiral that the nuclear industry takes for granted. They also argue that runaway economic growth per se is undesirable, when many resources are already scarce and becoming more so.

As pro-nuclear forces buy large blocks of television, time to convince California voters that nuclear power is essential to jobs, energy, and happiness itself, the many unresolved questions surrounding the safety of nuclear power should be answered conclusively before this state, and this nation embark on an irreversible nuclear future.