tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post1809645564170454998..comments2024-02-16T17:52:44.944-06:00Comments on The Nuclear Green Revolution: Naomi Oreskes and the Pseudoscientific War on Nuclear PowerCharles Bartonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01125297013064527425noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post-64564943377233660562015-12-18T12:02:12.330-06:002015-12-18T12:02:12.330-06:00Thanks Charles for this post. Your external links ...Thanks Charles for this post. Your external links are leading me to very interesting, thoughtful and thought provoking posts. I'll be looking at more of A Chemist in Langley's (https://achemistinlangley.wordpress.com/) posts, in particular.Andrew Jaremkohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07781060305332803073noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post-77402637318913130472015-12-18T08:25:16.549-06:002015-12-18T08:25:16.549-06:00Thanks for bringing up the background to these two...Thanks for bringing up the background to these two anti-nuclear sources. I read the article that you quote from, written by Naomi Oreskes, in the UK Guardian on-line newspaper and checked some of her sources including Jacobson's renewables "100% state by state roadmap". That didn't seem to have any serious numbers behind it, but maybe I never found them. Unusually all of the comments on her article that I read were against her position. Perhaps the shoot from the hip brigade didn't read it.<br />Unfortunately her position is taken on faith, and quoted as dogma, by many greens that I know here in France. They are not open to debating the issue of the value of nuclear power in reducing CO2 emissions, or the relative safety risks in utilizing different energy sources. It is after all a subject that requires an unbiased treatment of statistics and projections along with an understanding of the technologies involved. That isn't possible for most people so they just look at headlines and summaries.<br />They never address the issues that confront renewables such as the lack of a viable grid scale energy storage technology, securing the base load with backup generation and the stability of electrical supplies. They also seem to all think that ever greater energy conservation in the West will provide for the growing energy needs of rapidly developing countries like China, India and Brazil.<br />Anybody bothering to read your blog is probably already a convinced pro-nuclear campaigner on these issues but if they are in a position to convince others I recommend Mark Lynas's book "Nuclear 2.0". It's short, well argued and he has actually done some arithmetic to support his case!John in the Lothttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03859716926230240245noreply@blogger.com