Posted on 12/08/2005 12:17:22 PM PST by saganite
Montreal (CNSNews.com) - Nuclear energy would reduce the world's dependence on fossil fuels and help cut greenhouse gas emissions, said advocates at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Montreal.
"Expanding nuclear energy is one way that we can actually [reduce] reliance on fossil fuels in a big way," said Patrick Moore, a founding member of Greenpeace. Moore left the group in the 1980s after becoming disillusioned with what he considered the group's radical approach to environmental concerns. He currently heads the Canadian-based environmental advocacy group Greenspirit Strategies, and he blames liberal green groups for halting the expansion of nuclear energy.
"It is the environmental movement itself that is the primary impediment to the reduction of CO2 emission and fossil fuel consumption because they refuse to support the obvious alternatives" (nuclear power and hydro power), Moore told Cybercast News Service. Moore's pro-nuclear discussion at the U.N. conference on Monday evening drew skepticism and jeers from his former environmental colleagues.
Moore, who rejects alarmist predictions of human-caused "global warming," also praised the United States for refusing to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, calling the treaty "a colossal waste of time and money." (See related article)
But it was Moore's promotion of nuclear energy that met swift resistance by the movement he helped to found.
"History has shown [nuclear energy] is a problematic technology," said Kaisa Kosonen, an energy campaigner for Greenpeace Nordic, told Cybercast News Service.
Kosonen wants to see existing nuclear power phased out. She warned that creating more nuclear material creates attractive targets for terrorists. "I would not take that risk," she said.
Friends of the Earth International (FOEI) shared Greenpeace's anti-nuclear position.
"We don't support it. [Nuclear] represents a massive challenge, not only economically, but radioactive waste still represents a massive problem and quite frankly it's not particularly popular with the public," said Catherine Pearce, an international climate campaigner for FOEI.
Both Greenpeace and FOEI want to encourage the world to turn to renewable energy sources such as solar and wind power.
Fossil fuels currently make up about 85 percent of the world's energy consumption, followed by nuclear and hydro power at seven percent each. Only one percent of energy consumption comes from sources such as solar, wind and geothermal, according to Moore.
"We don't see any scenario where windmills and solar panels alone can solve the problem [of fossil fuel dependence,]" Moore said.
Moore praised nuclear energy for its reactor safety record and waste storage methods. He also dismissed concerns about two high-profile nuclear reactor accidents in the past.
"[Pennsylvania's] Three Mile Island was a success story," he said. "Radiation did not escape from Three Mile Island [in 1979]," Moore said, because a containment structure prevented radioactive leakage.
"[The Soviet Union's] Chernobyl [accident] was a sad accident waiting to happen because of the Soviet design and bad management," Moore said of the 1986 incident that killed 56 people.
Moore also dismissed fears of a nuclear plant being the target of terrorism. "Sure there is a possibility of nuclear terrorism, but all technology can be used for harm," he said.
"You don't ban technologies that are being used for good purposes just because they can also be used for evil," he added.
Anti-nuclear movies such as the Jane Fonda's "The China Syndrome" in 1979 further raised public fears about nuclear energy, Moore said.
"We have a population that is more afraid of nuclear when its record is far safer than many other technologies that we have," he said. "There is no basis for this fear. Nuclear is safe."
More than 8,000 government leaders, environmentalists and scientists are attending the U.N. conference to discuss ways of further limiting greenhouse gases beyond the provision set out in the Kyoto Protocol. Organizers are calling the conference, which runs until Dec. 9, the largest meeting since the Kyoto Climate Change Conference in 1997.
It's good to see a former greenpeace leader taking on the extremists in the current group.
The only idea the enviros like is killing off people, so as to reduce demand.
This Moore continues to show the alarmists for what they are.
"You don't ban technologies that are being used for good purposes just because they can also be used for evil," he added.
correction: you do if you're a liberal.
All technologies are problematic if they are not managed properly. That's no excuse for not using them.
The libs say they want solar and wind power. They just don't want to generate it anywhere near their homes.
MGY
The inability of greens to get behind nuclear, given their current fears of global warming, is the smoking gun regarding their true motives.
No matter what new technology ever gets discovered and no matter how non-polluting it is, they'll always hate it if it does not result in decreased economic development.
I guess there is no crisis then.
Moore praised nuclear energy for its reactor safety record and waste storage methods. He also dismissed concerns about two high-profile nuclear reactor accidents in the past. "[Pennsylvania's] Three Mile Island was a success story," he said. "Radiation did not escape from Three Mile Island [in 1979]," Moore said, because a containment structure prevented radioactive leakage. "[The Soviet Union's] Chernobyl [accident] was a sad accident waiting to happen because of the Soviet design and bad management," Moore said of the 1986 incident that killed 56 people. Moore also dismissed fears of a nuclear plant being the target of terrorism. "Sure there is a possibility of nuclear terrorism, but all technology can be used for harm," he said.
It's nice to see a Greenie grow up.
Anti-nuclear movies such as the Jane Fonda's "The China Syndrome" in 1979 further raised public fears about nuclear energy, Moore said.
If global warming does end up killing everybody, we know who to blame.
Nulear power is safer now with new technology. This makes them less of a threat to accidental or terror related accidents -- however security will always be part of a nuclear reactor business plan.
This discussion is interesting because countries like France absolutely depend on nuclear reactors for their electricity. They of course would welcome wind and solar power if they were able to handle the load, but since they are not, they need nuclear power. If a "green" country like France can approve nuclear power, what does this say about our obstructionist environmentalists?
I don't think France would adopt nuclear power if they had to make a decision now. They started their program about the same time we did and that was before the greens had as much influence as they currently do. In fact, I think there's a moratorium on further nuke plants in France.
" A littlie NOOKIE never hurt anyone"
Nuclear waste is a political problem, not a technical one. Even the weakest containment methods imaginable beat the standard method of disposing of coal and oil waste (which is to just dump it into the air and soil).
This is news to me, but what will the French do to replace plants or provide for growth? They don't have much hydro capability, and I would guess solar and wind are just as expensive there as here. Are the French going to harness the heat of burning automobilies or let people die in a heat wave? ( I know that was cruel) But they can't seriously propose burning fossil fuel? Can they?
No need to 'think' -- it is easy enough to find out. French will begin building a new EPR in Flamanville, Normandy in 2007 in addition to a fusion facility in country. "The President of EDF (ELECTRICITE DE FRANCE, the world's largest electrical utility, which owns and operates all of France's 58 nuclear reactors), Pierre Gadonneix, has confirmed the choice of Flamanville on thursday 21st october 2004, after a board meeting of EDF." See http://www.ecolo.org/archives/archives-nuc-en/2004-10-21-EPR-Flamanville.htm In fact, they fought bitterly with the Japanese over where the fusion facility would be built, and the French won.
The following is a little dated, but still makes the point that the French continue to move forward with commercial nuclear power technology.
"Following last year’s recommendation from the Office of Scientific and Technological Assessment to go ahead with the construction of the European Pressurized Water Reactor (EPR) and in anticipation of the French Parliament’s adoption of a national energy policy bill, Electricité de France is now set to launch the process leading to the construction of a new EPR nuclear reactor, the 59th PWR in France.
"On June 22, 2004 EDF’s board of directors authorized its chairman François Roussely to launch the process leading to the construction of a demonstration unit of the European pressurized water reactor (EPR) in France (1).
"Electricité de France said in a press communiqué its EPR development plan will take place in several stages:
· Consultations with host-site applicants and site selection during the summer of 2004;
· Providing information to the CNDP, a national commission in charge of conducting a year-long public debate; · Licensing phase and construction period, per se, expected to last about 57 months.
"Roussely said that he will meet with regional officials interested in hosting the unit (during the parliamentary debate four legislators pleaded for construction of the new EPR in their constituencies) and report back to the board by August 1, 2004.
see more at
http://www.info-france-usa.org/intheus/nuclear/n2f2/spring2004.asp
http://www.worldenergy.org/wec-geis/publications/default/tech_papers/17th_congress/3_2_03.asp
:')
Greens Clash at Climate Change Conference
CNSNews.com Satire | December 20, 2004 | Dover Smeed
Posted on 12/27/2005 9:49:00 PM PST by A. Pole
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1547952/posts
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.