But if the newly-elected Legislature needs more confirmation on the desirability of nuclear power, it can take a cue from President-elect Barack Obama.

Obama may not be among the most gung-ho supporters of nuclear plant construction. But he made his position clear in two important campaign statements.

"I favor nuclear power as one component of our energy mix."

"It is unlikely that we can meet our aggressive climate goals if we eliminate nuclear power from the table."

Obama is right.

Wisconsin's 24-year-old moratorium on nuclear power plant construction is wrong.

The foundation for removing the moratorium has already been laid. Earlier this year, the Governor's Global Warming Task Force recommended that the state modify the moratorium, lowering barriers to plant construction.

That recommendation followed the a decision in 2007 by the Legislature's special committee on nuclear power to support eliminating the moratorium altogether.

So far, however, adamant nuclear power opponents have blocked attempts to remove the moratorium, which has prevented the state from adding to the three nuclear reactors that generate 20 percent of the state's electricity.

More opponents should see the same light that dawned on environmental policy consultant Patrick Moore, who spoke at an energy conference at UW-Madison this week.

Nearly 40 years ago Moore co-founded the environmental group Greenpeace. He opposed nuclear power.

Then he realized that if the world is to shift to clean energy sources to fight the threat of global warming, nuclear power must play a major role.

No longer with Greenpeace, he now promotes nuclear power as a clean, safe source for electricity.

If Wisconsin is to meet its growing demand for electricity with clean sources, then wind power, solar energy, conservation and other strategies should be employed. But wind and solar power are costly and not reliable enough. Conservation helps but cannot keep up with growth in power demands.

Nuclear power is required.

Nuclear power is not free of problems. The high cost of plant construction and questions about long-term waste disposal are drawbacks. But solutions are available.

The moratorium should go.