Originally Posted by martinw  Dear Donna,
Leaving aside the current religious debate, and returning to the original one about "global warming" or "whatever", I'm entirely with you.
France has had a comprehensive nuclear programme for many years and , I believe, stuffs a whole load of nuclear-generated electricity through submarine cables to the UK. France has had no problems, and neither has the UK. It seems to work as a renewable energy source without any great impact as the depletion of fossil fuels which might be better deployed otherwise for the manufacture of plastics, lubricants, etc etc. This is a vital natural resource.
Personally, I'm not a big fan of pissing away fossil fuels, and it has nothing to do with "global warming" or "climate change".
My modest take on this, is that it would be a huge tragedy to see my tiny country covered in wind-farms that will have an absolutely minimal prospect of large-scale electricity generation, recommended by "experts" with snouts in the trough, and crowed about by politicians who attempt to convince the electorate that they are some kind of "planet saving" saints .
Most of our leaders trained as lawyers. No need for further comment.
End of rant....
Best wishes,
Martin |
Yes, lawyers seem to be running our country. You are from the US aren't you? I do, like you, think that a lot of junk science and impractical solutions will be bandied about. I only hope that reason prevails and practicable steps will be taken. The past has been bad but the bankrupt ideas of the radical right have demonstrated themselves quite well of late. This presidents approval rating is hovering around 30%, that gives me hope. I do believe in GW but admit that it's not a proven thing, only about a 95% certainty. Yes, oil would be better used for making commodities. Less pollution and more value. Nuclear is a good interim answer, fusion is the ultimate goal.
Take care,
Donna