Should America Go Nuclear?

04/21/21 • 34 min

4 Listeners

President Biden has set an ambitious goal for the United States to be carbon-neutral by 2050. Achieving it means weaning the country off fossil fuels and using more alternative energy sources like solar and wind. But environmentalists disagree about whether nuclear power should be part of the mix.

Todd Larsen, executive co-director for consumer and corporate engagement at Green America and Meghan Claire Hammond, senior fellow at the Good Energy Collective, a policy research organization focusing on new nuclear technology, join Jane Coaston to debate whether nuclear power is worth the risks.

And then the Times columnist Bret Stephens joins Jane to talk about why he thinks America needs a liberal party.

Mentioned in this episode:

“Why Nuclear Power Must Be Part of the Energy Solution,” by Richard Rhodes in Yale Environment 360.
“I oversaw the U.S. nuclear power industry. Now I think it should be banned,” by Gregory Jaczko in The Washington Post
The TV mini-series “Chernobyl,” a depiction of the 1986 explosion at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant
“America Could Use a Liberal Party,” by Bret Stephens

Share your arguments with us: We want to hear what you’re arguing about with your family, your friends and your frenemies. Leave us a voice mail message at (347) 915-4324. We may use excerpts from your audio in a future episode.

You can find transcripts (posted midday) and more episodes of "The Argument" at nytimes.com/the-argument, and you can find Jane on Twitter @janecoaston.

“The Argument” is produced by Phoebe Lett, Elisa Gutierrez and Vishakha Darbha and edited by Alison Bruzek and Paula Szuchman; fact-checking by Kate Sinclair; music and sound design by Isaac Jones.

And then the Times columnist Bret Stephens joins Jane to talk about why he thinks America needs a liberal party.

Mentioned in this episode:

“Why Nuclear Power Must Be Part of the Energy Solution,” by Richard Rhodes in Yale Environment 360.
“I oversaw the U.S. nuclear power industry. Now I think it should be banned,” by Gregory Jaczko in The Washington Post
The TV mini-series “Chernobyl,” a depiction of the 1986 explosion at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant
“America Could Use a Liberal Party,” by Bret Stephens

You can find transcripts (posted midday) and more episodes of "The Argument" at nytimes.com/the-argument, and you can find Jane on Twitter @janecoaston.

Previous Episode

Why the Anti-Abortion Side Will Lose, Even if It Wins

The Supreme Court — and its post-Trump conservative majority — is currently deciding whether to take up a case that could be the final blow to Roe v. Wade. Overturning Roe, the 48-year-old decision protecting the right to an abortion in America, would leave abortion regulation up to the states. But some abortion opponents think that’s not far enough and are pushing the movement to change its focus to securing a 14th Amendment declaration of fetal personhood.

Ross Douthat wrote about the diverging anti-abortion movement and why both factions are doomed to fail as long as the movement is shackled to a Republican Party that refuses to enact public policy to help struggling families. Michelle Goldberg wrote a response column to Ross’s, claiming his argument was a fallacy. To bring their dueling columns to life, Jane Coaston brought the two writers together to debate the future of abortion protection and restriction in America.

Mentioned in this episode:

Ross’s Sunday Review column “What Has the Pro-Life Movement Won?”
Michelle’s responding column, “The Authoritarian Plan for a National Abortion Ban”
John Finnis’s article in the Catholic journal “First Things,” “Abortion Is Unconstitutional”
Emma Green’s article in “The Atlantic” “The Anti-Abortion-Rights Movement Prepares to Build a Post-Roe World”
“Defenders of the Unborn” by Daniel K. Williams

You can find transcripts (posted midday) and more episodes of "The Argument" at nytimes.com/the-argument, and you can find Jane on Twitter @janecoaston.

Next Episode

Police Reform Is Coming. What Should It Look Like?

Derek Chauvin has been found guilty of the murder of George Floyd. But whatever bittersweet feelings the rare outcome elicited were short-lived, since instances of police brutality compound almost daily. There’s no debate: Policing is broken in America. But how do we fix it?

To answer that question, Jane brings together a round table to debate solutions ranging from modernizing training, stronger ties between police misconduct and financial culpability, and divesting from policing to invest in community-based services.

Joining Jane is Randy Shrewsberry, a former police officer and the executive director of the Institute for Criminal Justice Training Reform; Rashawn Ray, a professor of sociology at the University of Maryland and a David M. Rubenstein fellow in governance studies at the Brookings Institution; and Ash-Lee Woodard Henderson, a leader in the Movement for Black Lives and the co-executive director of the Highlander Research and Education Center in Tennessee.

Mentioned in this episode: