Monday, July 17, 2006

Global Warming Skeptics Go Nuclear

Possible proof that bad decision making is genetically hard wired. After spending nearly half a century shouting down the science of global warming as a sham, the right-wing skeptics concede that it is indeed real then embrace nuclear power as the only solution, all in the same day.

"The old right has been on an arduous journey, with most finally converted to the truth universally acknowledged, except by flat-earthers: the world is warming at life-on-earth threatening speed. When the climate-deniers' case collapsed, they retreated to an ideological redoubt claiming global warming was a natural phenomenon, not amenable to man-made remedy. But that fortress crumbled too, and even George Bush, last of the deniers, conceded. For some reason the old deniers, barely batting an eyelid, shifted over to nuclear as the only salvation, though those who have been so wrong owe a little humility when it comes to next steps."

Link via DeSmogBlog


Lookout Mountain said...

nuclear is the only way we can provide more energy with less CO2. (especially once hydro is tapped out)

Scruffy Dan said...

and how do you plan to deal with the nuclear wate?

scottie said...

Right on, k o except wind power and solar power, which are a drop in the bucket, depending where you live, is better. I do not know where all this right- wing talk about nuclear power came from, as the NDP in Ontario are against it.

scot. said...

Right on k o. The NDP in Ontario are against it.

liz.t said...

right on, ko. Wind power and solar power are better, but limited. The right-wingers againt it The NDP in Ontario are, also.

Odiyya said...

I hate to sound glib, but I need to first of all point out that the NDP is left wing scottie & scot (are you the same people?).

More to the point i agree with scruffy dan. While nuclear can fill a large amount of capacity in one lump sum, proposing to expand its use when we can't contain the nuclear waste we're currently generating is rash at best. Nor would it require a concerted PR campaign if it truly was such an easy solution. See my earlier post here:

I think we would do far better by following the example of Sweden, who has committed to no nuclear expansion, conservation, and green energy choices in their plant to be carbon neutral:,,1705315,00.html

We have similar resources available to us, and could have similar opportunities with some demonstrated leadership. Reliance on nuclear for Canada sounds a bit too much like a business opportunity for the nuclear industry rather than a real solution. Which paints unquestioning right wing support of it in a more nefarious light.