Going Nuclear (Author's a founder of Greenpeace!!)

The Washington Post ^ | April 15, 2006 | Patrick Moore

[libstripper]

In the early 1970s when I helped found Greenpeace, I believed that nuclear energy was synonymous with nuclear holocaust, as did most of my compatriots. That's the conviction that inspired Greenpeace's first voyage up the spectacular rocky northwest coast to protest the testing of U.S. hydrogen bombs in Alaska's Aleutian Islands. Thirty years on, my views have changed, and the rest of the environmental movement needs to update its views, too, because nuclear energy may just be the energy source that can save our planet from another possible disaster: catastrophic climate change.

Look at it this way: More than 600 coal-fired electric plants in the United States produce 36 percent of U.S. emissions -- or nearly 10 percent of global emissions -- of CO2, the primary greenhouse gas responsible for climate change. Nuclear energy is the only large-scale, cost-effective energy source that can reduce these emissions while continuing to satisfy a growing demand for power. And these days it can do so safely.

[libstripper]

The author of this column, one of the founders of Greenpeace, makes a compelling case for going forward with nuclear power.

[Chena]

Good post, libstripper. BTTT

[saganite]

He's made this case before. He's been disowned by the environazis because what he's saying is heretical.

[stm]

"In the early 1970s when I helped found Greenpeace......"

I almost stopped reading there but it seems he has finally come to his senses

[Drango]

Even the French know nuclear makes sense.

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

Wrong about it then and wrong about global warming now.
It is not the fake global warming but to better use our assets.

[adversarial]

So...he finally wakes up and tells us the cause he fought for was wrong, but now he knows the truth and wants to lead us there.

he makes a compelling case for not listening to anything he says!

[SuzyQue]

Many of us did stupid things in the early '70s. This is monumentally stupid, but it does sound like he's come around.

[freedumb2003]

The author of this column, one of the founders of Greenpeace, makes a compelling case for going forward with nuclear power.

He can't unring the bell he rang. The damage to the Nuclear industry was done in the 70s. By now, we should have hundreds oif nuclear plants.

Instead we have a handful. This is thanks to idiots like this who know nothing about science.

He can't soothe his conscience now by saying "I wuz wrong."

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

If there's one thing the French can do, is build nuclear power plants.

Our energy system is a joke.

[NonValueAdded]

Bacon in the treetops???

[stm]

And sell the technology to people that would use it against the rest of the world. Those grubby whores would sell their own mother to the enemy if they could get a decent price.

[CitizenUSA]

Well, ain't that grand! Thirty years later, a Greenpeace founder realizes he was wrong about nuclear power. Well, thanks a bunch mister, because it's enviro-nazis like yourself who we can thank in large part for our continuing dependence on foreign oil!

[TrollBridge]

I'm reposted my concerns from a previous thread..and no, I'm not a environazi:

My only problem with nuclear power is the fission products that are produced. Cesnium and PU-239 are in particular really bad products that last a long time. Talk about NIMBY. I would just be happy living with the CO2 produced by fossil fuel plants than with radioactive elements that we don't know what to do with once we've extracted the energy from it.

Having said that, I believe wholeheartedly in a hydrogen economy based on fusion. Of course, being able to tip the balance between the ratio of output energy with respect to input energy is going to take years of technological development but that's another story.

[stm]

He may have come around but his credibility is pretty much zero after his antics in the 70's and 80's

[Petronski]

Great post bump!

[saganite]

I believe wholeheartedly in a hydrogen economy based on fusion.

You do? I hope the Easter Bunny leaves you lots of eggs. Better get that list ready for Santa. Only 8 months 'til xmas.

[Dan Evans]

Maybe he wants to reserect the nuclear industry so Greenpeace can blackmail them again.

[Oldexpat]

The waste heat from nuclear plants can also be used to process oil shale and oil sands.
Nuclear is the only answer to our energy needs..we need to have both politicians and business men with the guts to stand up and be counted..but don't count on that and don't sell your oil stocks quite yet.

[Dan Evans]

Cesnium and PU-239 are in particular really bad products that last a long time.

Not nearly as dangerous as a lot of toxins that last forever. Even Chernobyl killed fewer people than about three airline accidents.