Power for the upcoming generation
In the news recently, a leading Green thinker wrote a call to action directed at environmentalist groups urging them to accept nuclear power as a necessary measure to control climate change before it's too late.
As one can imagine, the usual suspects immediately had the usual knee-jerk reactions to the suggestion, thus combining both the valid premise that arguments from authority should not necessarily be accepted at face value, and the faulty one that says that "Nuclear is bad, no matter what, no matter how," which stems from... what?
Nuclear energy has the interesting distinction, according to some discussion of it that I've read, of being the only form of generated "dirty" power that actually visits its primary harmful effects on humans, as opposed to the other creatures we share the planet with. From some accounts, both Bikini Atoll and the Chernobyl region are thriving ecologies, where the flora and fauna have lived quite happily and comfortably. Which is not to say that there's nothing bad about Nuclear Power, but it does kind of hint that it might be a good way to handle the growing need for electricity without resorting to burning more fossil fuels. Which, of course, should be saved for _important_ things, like powering SUVs and such.
Anyway, regardless of the actual value of the proposition, I find it depressing that organizations that claim to be committed to doing the best they can for the earth steadfastly refuse to examine solutions that exist outside their faith (see my earlier post about environmentalism == religion).
This news item gets some interesting discussion on Slashdot and probably on Mefi, but the latter is down.Tweet