Education, politics, and anything else that catches my attention.
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
One Global Warming Guy Now Gets It
Frequent RotLC reader and commenter Cameron claims not to be one of these--and I truly hope he's not--but he doesn't want to accept that these people are out there. They are.
4 comments:
Anonymous
said...
I think there are crazy people out there, but I don't think I know anyone "tackling the problem without using technological solutions". I know people who turn electrical things off when they aren't using them, which makes sense. Compact fluorescent bulbs are a technological advancement. Same with solar cells, wind turbines, and geothermal power. I would not call myself one of those people who want to take us back a few centuries, and I'm also going to say that if there are any such people, their numbers are very, very small. Unless by "technology" you mean nuclear power. I'm still not going to advocate nuclear power until we know a way to handle nuclear waste, because the current solution "If we hide it in a mountain, it's not there" is not going to work indefinitely. Getting the uranium in the first place isn't too environmentally friendly either, with all the mining involved. Also, if there's an accident at a nuclear plant it's a much much much bigger deal than at any other sort of power plant. However, once something good is figured out I'm all for nuclear power.
Cameron, compact fluorescent bulbs are OK, but not great. Mercury in them is one thing, the fact that they're not supposed to be in enclosed or recessed fixtures is another. I have several, but let's not overstate their usefulness.
And nuclear power has been around for over half a century--how much more evidence do you need? Heck, even FRANCE gets well over half (70%, last number I saw) of its electricity from nuclear energy.
Mining isn't going away. I'm all for Yucca Mountain. So when do we build our next reactor? Heck, even the Iranians are on board for peaceful nuclear energy--certainly it must be OK for us.
According to the science professor I had in college, coal burning power plants actually produce far more radioactive material than nuclear power plants do! All that soot and ash is radioactive and they then mix it into asphalt to use in roads, etc. As I understand it, for the amount of energy produced versus waste byproduct, nuclear power is actually one of our best options. If the browncoats were realistically concerned about our "carbon footprints," they would be looking into replacing coal power plants with nuclear power plants.
4 comments:
I think there are crazy people out there, but I don't think I know anyone "tackling the problem without using technological solutions". I know people who turn electrical things off when they aren't using them, which makes sense. Compact fluorescent bulbs are a technological advancement. Same with solar cells, wind turbines, and geothermal power. I would not call myself one of those people who want to take us back a few centuries, and I'm also going to say that if there are any such people, their numbers are very, very small. Unless by "technology" you mean nuclear power. I'm still not going to advocate nuclear power until we know a way to handle nuclear waste, because the current solution "If we hide it in a mountain, it's not there" is not going to work indefinitely. Getting the uranium in the first place isn't too environmentally friendly either, with all the mining involved. Also, if there's an accident at a nuclear plant it's a much much much bigger deal than at any other sort of power plant. However, once something good is figured out I'm all for nuclear power.
Cameron, compact fluorescent bulbs are OK, but not great. Mercury in them is one thing, the fact that they're not supposed to be in enclosed or recessed fixtures is another. I have several, but let's not overstate their usefulness.
And nuclear power has been around for over half a century--how much more evidence do you need? Heck, even FRANCE gets well over half (70%, last number I saw) of its electricity from nuclear energy.
Mining isn't going away. I'm all for Yucca Mountain. So when do we build our next reactor? Heck, even the Iranians are on board for peaceful nuclear energy--certainly it must be OK for us.
Blogging serendipity is amazing. I hadn't noticed before, but here's the last line in the article linked by RightWingNation:
"Earlier this week the Government gave the go-ahead for a new generation of nuclear power plants across the UK."
According to the science professor I had in college, coal burning power plants actually produce far more radioactive material than nuclear power plants do! All that soot and ash is radioactive and they then mix it into asphalt to use in roads, etc. As I understand it, for the amount of energy produced versus waste byproduct, nuclear power is actually one of our best options. If the browncoats were realistically concerned about our "carbon footprints," they would be looking into replacing coal power plants with nuclear power plants.
Post a Comment