TEAM BUSH promotes nuclear power as solution to climate change.

[adios]

Not much time for me today to spend here. I'll be back sometime this weekend. Thought I'd post this little blurb from the Washington Roundup column in today's WSJ. Bush recognizing that the burning of fossil fuels is a direct contributor to global warming. Well what about nuclear power? Please spare me the usual left wing rhetoric that the Bush is the lackey of the likes of GE, Westinghouse and such.

TEAM BUSH promotes nuclear power as solution to climate change.

At coming G-8 huddle in Scotland, administration aides will hail nuclear energy as clean way to meet demand from rising powers India and China, which now drives oil prices higher. The administration also sees opportunity for U.S. firms General Electric and Westinghouse, which are working on new plant designs.

That stance complicates life for host Blair. Nuclear power remains controversial in the U.K. and Germany amid environmental and weapons-proliferation concerns. But "we're all going to have to diversify away from hydrocarbons over time," Bush tells CNBC.

[andyfox]

Heard a headline on the radio this morning about $100/barrel oil in the next few years. That being the case, one would think there'd be a renewed push for alternative energe resources, and that nuclear would indeed be the alternative of choice for Team Bush.

[johnc]

The idea to me of Global Warming as a real possiblity seems very questionable at best. From a statisical standpoint, the amount of quantifiable data put in terms of timeline of planet earth is minute and way too small to be even slightly statistically significant taken in perspective with the earth's own "natural" global warming and cooling trends over virtually millions of years. Bottomline Global Warming being hastened by fossil fuel consumption is a good guess at best. That being said, the need to drastically reduce the world's dependance on fossil fuels should be followed through based upon:
#1 - It's a limited resource and we'll be literally be left out in the cold at the rate we're going.
#2 - The dependance on fossil fuels has become the US's Achilles Heel in regards to the Middle East further entrenching our interests in their region (Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia).
#3 - Given #2, reduction of our dependance by maybe 25% will provide th US enormous leverage in the region without dropping a bomb or firing a bullet paving the way for real, viable diplomatic solutions to the ills plaging the region without the spector of ulterior motives.
#4 - Undeniable localized pollution caused by the burning of fossil fuels leading a plethora of health concerns.

I see nuclear power as a stop-gap measure until less strategically targetable sources can be vigorously explored and put on line such as solar, cold fusion (which will lead to cost effective hydrogen cell production).

[player24]

Nice post johnc - rational and informative.

[The once and future king]

[ QUOTE ]
Nice post johnc - rational and informative.

[/ QUOTE ]

A:Scientific opinion = Man is influencing global warming.
B:Poster on Poker forum = I dont think it is.

Surely I dont have to point out the idioicy of going with option B.

[player24]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nice post johnc - rational and informative.

[/ QUOTE ]

A:Scientific opinion = Man is influencing global warming.
B:Poster on Poker forum = I dont think it is.

Surely I dont have to point out the idioicy of going with option B.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure I can decode your cryptic post - but I reiterate my support for johnc's post on this topic. He provides four good reasons to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels - none of which rely on junk science.

[masse75]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nice post johnc - rational and informative.

[/ QUOTE ]

A:Scientific opinion = Man is influencing global warming.
B:Poster on Poker forum = I dont think it is.

Surely I dont have to point out the idioicy of going with option B.

[/ QUOTE ]

Global warming is not a fact.

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
Global warming is not a fact.


[/ QUOTE ]

= 1 more human that is too lazy to click on a link and read. Not to mention too dense to listen to every single scientist that has ever published a paper in reputable journal in the last 20 years. His counterpoints are almost as well researched and almost as eloquent as a toddler that hasn't been potty trained yet.

Humans like this are worth little more then the cattle used for hamburger meat IMO. Cannabilism should be legalized and dumbass steak should appear on the menu at your local psych ward.

[The once and future king]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nice post johnc - rational and informative.

[/ QUOTE ]

A:Scientific opinion = Man is influencing global warming.
B:Poster on Poker forum = I dont think it is.

Surely I dont have to point out the idioicy of going with option B.

[/ QUOTE ]

Global warming is not a fact.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its a fact that those that make thier conclusions based on the vague suppositions of an non scientist on a poker forum whilst ignoring the opinions of the scientific community and its arduos and ongoing research are fools.

[andyfox]

Good article in the April 25th edition of The New Yorker, the first of a three-parter. It's a report from the Arctic on the realities of global warming.