--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" <fintlewoodlewix@...> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" <wayback71@> wrote: > > > > I just saw Pandora's Promise, by Robert Stone, an environmentalist who has > > in the past been active in anti-nuclear energy protests. He got convinced > > otherwise and has made this docu. It features info and also interviews > > with several environmentalists who have educated themselves and changed > > their minds about nuclear energy. Stuart Brand (Whole Earth catalogue) is > > one and so is Mark Lynas, who wrote the book Six Degrees in 2007. I have > > mentioned that book here several times - terrific and accessible read about > > climate change. Lynas was anti nuclear for years - and now changed his > > mind. A worthwhile movie to see - and while I am not at all an expert on > > nuclear power, it made a really good case for the positives. It also seems > > that there is a type of nuclear power (IFR) that produces waste that is > > recyclable by the nuclear plant itself. The safeguards on these are also > > incredible. > > > These pro nuclear environmentalists make me laugh, I think they > come from a place where we absolutely *have* to keep consuming > power at the insane rate we have for the last hundred years and > that cutting back on consumption isn't a plausible option.
The docu mentions this problem. It seems that the pro-nuclear environmentalists have become rather practical. First, they don't believe that cutting back is an option - that to think that our own Western populations will cut back is a pipe dream. It might be smart and the right thing to do, but it won't happen. And seond, for us to expect the developing nations to not have what we have - cars, unlimited energy - it not "fair" and also is not happening. China and India and Brazil are moving full steam ahead and will use whatever energy source is around. Second, they feel that given that our demands for energy will not be dropping, we cannot just count on water, wind and solar sources. Anything that helps is good, but those systems simply will not solve the problem anytime soon. We are running out of time, and to wait for other types of energy is wishful thinking for now. > > The sad fact about nuclear power is that we don't have enough > uranium on this planet to outlast the coal supply should we > switch wholesale and build more reactors. > > Then there's terrorism, if al queda had been smart they would have > flown the 9/11 planes into a nuclear reactor (but don't give them > ideas) and then there is the black market in dirty plutonium, so > simple to make a dirty bomb, drive it into a major city and.... > It's just bound to happen sooner or later. > > But the real disaster is waste, I have heard of these fast breeder > reactors but I'm not even sure they have been demonstrated to work very well > and they do still create a small amount of waste and it > becomes much more toxic than the 11,000,000 barrels of stuff we > have lying around the UK waiting to be buried. I don't know, but in the docu they said that these reactors had been around since the late 40's. A decision was made at that time by Rickover (sp?) to go with the other incredibly more polluting systems in building power plants (and submarines). Scientists of today seem pretty certain that the waste is mostly recyclable and the plants are very very safe compared to the current style. Whether that waste is more polluting, I have no idea and it was not addressed in the film.....At the end of this movie, there were questions and answers with Robert Stone. As he was walking out, a 60ish year old man came up and congratulated him on a good job, mentioned that he himself had spent 40 years in the nuclear power industry (I think an engineer), and that there were risks not mentioned in the film. He felt that nuclear (the fast breeder) was our only option at this time in history and given the pace of global climate change and the energy demands of our planet. However, he did feel we should also be having a more thorough conversation about the risks (he did not elaborate on them - wish he had). > > And that is what will happen, just brush it all under the carpet > and let mankind of the future deal with it. I read that British Nuclear Fuels > put a few million in the bank hoping that some bright > spark in some wiser future will know how to deal with it. Until > then it's being buried in places like this: > > http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2011/apr/24/nuclear-waste-storage > > Saw a chilling documentary about this place. Just what do you put > on the door? Imagine if our Neanderthal predecessors had been > burying dangerous waste since they first came to Europe, it would > still be as dangerous as the day they sealed it up. Do our descendants > deserve to have to deal with our stupidity just so we can keep our > 24/7 lifestyle? They'll be kicking us for not going solar, which is > the *only* serious choice. No our descendants do not deserve this. But there won't be descendants unless we change our demand for and source of energy. Demand is not going away. Solar and wind and water won't manage the problem until it is way too late. Many of the same big environmentalists who have switched and are now pro nuclear are also now pro GMO food. Same idea: the world is going to run out food, and the way we raise food and animals for slaughter is incredibly polluting. We need to raise lots of food using less land and fewer chemicals. GMO's do that. I hate that idea. It feels like a terrible compromise to say that while we see the problems in nuclear or GMO food, we must go for a lesser evil or our planet is cooked. I am on the fence with both issues, but my mind is open to the possibility that huge compromises may need to be made. I believe we are on the brink of disaster with global climate change, and it might already be too late for anything to make a difference. The window of opportunity might be gone. Maybe chaos and then a collapse of most civilizations will bring things to a halt and that is the way to go. I just don't know. But we have major difficulties ahead and continuing to think that we all have to reduce our energy demands and eat organic is ignoring reality. >
