The Lifeboat News
[ Post a Response | The Lifeboat News ]
Re: Nuclear power = good environmental credentials.= .actually they may well be...
I've changed my mind about nuclear power in the last year or two, in some situations. It could be an unwelcome but necessary solution to serious energy shortfalls in some countries and jurisdictions. If it's continuing to burn fossil fuels vs nuclear power, then it's nuclear power. I'm looking at what's happening in Germany. Three nuclear reactors sitting idle in the middle of the most serious energy crisis that country has ever experienced, outside of wartime. And the German Greens, who are part of the coalition government, totally opposed to their use, the same "Greens" by the way who are the most vocal and activists supporters of the West's proxy war against Russia. Who could be certain today that there'll be rioting in the streets if the German populace start freezing in the winter? Nuclear power has its own serious issues, we know that, but compared to a stifling and unliveable planet? Certainly a number of environmentalist support(ed) nuclear power, and that included James Lovelock and Stephen Tindale, and presently includes James Hansen among others, including Monbiot. Nuclear power vs renewables is not a black and white issue. it's nuanced, and you can indeed be an environmentalist and support, probably reluctantly, nuclear power. . Perhaps renewables can be installed in sufficient amounts and in sufficient time, but I'm beginning to think they won't be. In which case nuclear power can help us manage the fifty year or so window of energy shortfall until renewables can take over. I believe you criticism of Monbiot in your simplistic posting, basically insinuating he's a humbug in his environmentalism because he does support nuclear power is wrong- headed and unfair to a man who does wrestle with his conscience about all this matters. He'a come to a conclusion you don't like, nor did I, but as I say, I'm beginning to change my mind.