tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post5742072072135547655..comments2024-02-16T17:52:44.944-06:00Comments on The Nuclear Green Revolution: The Oil Drum Nuclear DebateCharles Bartonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01125297013064527425noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post-73911473418830434082008-04-08T15:49:00.000-05:002008-04-08T15:49:00.000-05:00Man, unc, that Eric Blair is a wacko. - GBIt has g...Man, unc, that Eric Blair is a wacko. - GB<BR/><BR/>It has gotten worse today. <BR/><BR/>An old mountain lady in Campbell County, Tennessee once said to me, "Pay it no never mind. He don't know what he's sayin."Charles Bartonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01125297013064527425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post-44980194490921040082008-04-08T13:03:00.000-05:002008-04-08T13:03:00.000-05:00Charles H, I understand your beliefs are sincere. ...Charles H, I understand your beliefs are sincere. I see no point in arguing with you about AGW. There are other equally pressing reasons for switching to a carbon free energy economy. The peaking of oil production, for example, and the expected world wide shortage of coal production. The cost of natural gas is also increasing significantly. At any rate, we out to be thinking about preserving fossil fuel stocks for future use in chemical industrial production.<BR/><BR/>There are significant health related cost associated with the use of fossil fuels in transportation and energy production. At present producers and consumers do not pay those health costs.Charles Bartonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01125297013064527425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post-54906157352617986802008-04-08T11:49:00.000-05:002008-04-08T11:49:00.000-05:00Charles,I should have added..I believe most seriou...Charles,<BR/><BR/>I should have added..<BR/><BR/>I believe most serious skeptics (the engineers and scientist) are generally supportive of more nuclear power. This is especially true with the nuclear waste advantages of thorium.<BR/><BR/>I personally would be happy if coal was phased out quickly and replaced by thorium nuclear. It can be cheaper and cleaner and safer compared to anything else. One does not need to believe co2 is bad to come to this conclusion.<BR/><BR/>So keep pushing the thorium message hard. Its a winner.<BR/><BR/>charlesHAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post-13511419314660274982008-04-08T11:37:00.000-05:002008-04-08T11:37:00.000-05:00Charles,I'm for policy based on solid science. I ...Charles,<BR/><BR/>I'm for policy based on solid science. I see the same poor science support for GW as I see in opposition to nuclear. Many times it is the same eco religion member making the poor arguments.<BR/><BR/>The most effective GW skeptics are engineers/scientists from non-climate science backgrounds (they are not looking for their next grant). The highly qualified persons are looking at the data and analysis supporting GW and finding many serious problems.<BR/><BR/>I can easily understand why someone who is strongly supportive of more nuclear power (especially thorium based) would feel comfortable with the co2 is evil theme. As I said previously, this is the silver lining in all the GW foolishness. Some eco sensitive persons will support nuclear since it is the only serious base load technology with no co2 impact.<BR/><BR/>So lets get some of the $2B/yr spent on GW hand wringing spent on thorium MSR development. If it makes some more comfortable thinking of this in the context of a GW insurance policy that's fine by me.<BR/><BR/>But please, do not call GW skeptics oil shills, nuts etc. It simply is not true and puts you in the same company as the eco-religionist blocking nuclear development. <BR/><BR/>charlesH<BR/>Orem, Ut (retired)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post-16907098484675428672008-04-08T07:56:00.000-05:002008-04-08T07:56:00.000-05:00Anon, You are repeating every verse of the anti-GW...Anon, You are repeating every verse of the anti-GW line. I stopped debating global warming skeptics some time ago. We are starting to run out of oil, coal will be gone in another hundred years of so. Using carbon based fuels creates pollution and has adverse impacts on human health. So even if AGW weren't happening, we need to do something about energy. <BR/><BR/>GW skeptics have a choice. Either come to the table and join the conversation about post-carbon energy, or disempower yourself by ignoring it.Charles Bartonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01125297013064527425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post-6737779132712896532008-04-07T22:55:00.000-05:002008-04-07T22:55:00.000-05:00Anonymous, you can be as anti-GW as you like...as ...Anonymous, you can be as anti-GW as you like...as long as you're pro-nuke. :)<BR/><BR/>Man, unc, that Eric Blair is a wacko.Greg Bartonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14338418756889540689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post-80051883268572630752008-04-07T22:25:00.000-05:002008-04-07T22:25:00.000-05:00Charles,Many of the anti nuclear persons you debat...Charles,<BR/><BR/>Many of the anti nuclear persons you debated on the Oil Drum share a kind of eco religion that has embraced GW as a club to restrict continued development.<BR/><BR/>A few things I have picked up regarding GW<BR/><BR/>a) the whole GW issue is being driven by eco religionist and grant seeking scientists. The US spends about $2B on GW research each year. If there is no GW crisis then there is no need to spend so much money vs other worthy areas.<BR/><BR/>b) Co2 is plant food. Commercial greenhouse add co2.<BR/><BR/>c) Co2 does contribute to warming but the effect is small and a log function. it is not linear and certainly not exponential. Thus since co2 is increasing linearly the effect on temp will be less in the future than it has been in the past.<BR/><BR/>d) most of the warming is in the winter, at night in the higher latitudes. read longer growing season, less ice, ....<BR/><BR/>We are most ever so slightly from a arctic climate to a tropical climate. (this is bad)<BR/><BR/>e) The most credible negative of co2 induced warming is higher sea levels. a foot or two over the next 100 yrs. But on the other hand we get longer growing seasons in the higher latitudes and increased plant growth from co2 fertilization.<BR/><BR/>So if you have a beach house build if a few feet higher, otherwise you can relax.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post-77471736954425341282008-04-07T21:57:00.000-05:002008-04-07T21:57:00.000-05:00The point of my story about hearing Jerry Olsen ta...The point of my story about hearing Jerry Olsen talk in 1971 about the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere, is that Olsen was right about everything that he predicted would happened to our climate in the last generation. I am impressed when a scientific theory demonstrates the power to bring about produce predictions.Charles Bartonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01125297013064527425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post-72339970661989055562008-04-07T21:44:00.000-05:002008-04-07T21:44:00.000-05:00Charles,I am a GW skeptic. I have studied the arg...Charles,<BR/><BR/>I am a GW skeptic. I have studied the arguments on both sides and I am qualified to do so (I have a BS in physics and an MBA).<BR/><BR/>I strongly support nuclear power (especially thorium MSR). The one silver lining I see to the foolishness over GW is that nuclear has beome more attractive.<BR/><BR/>Might I suggest a web site for some good impartial (no oil money or grant money) commentary on GW. <BR/><BR/>http://motls.blogspot.com/<BR/><BR/>CharlesHAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post-49830257127161842062008-04-07T19:24:00.000-05:002008-04-07T19:24:00.000-05:00You have got it. The attitude is, the world is en...You have got it. The attitude is, the world is ending hah rah!Charles Bartonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01125297013064527425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post-69643584251651941472008-04-07T19:08:00.000-05:002008-04-07T19:08:00.000-05:00It’s ironic that you’ve been accused of fanaticism...It’s ironic that you’ve been accused of fanaticism for making a calm and rational case for nuclear energy. Most of the real fanaticism on the Oil Drum seems to come from a few hard core Luddites and misanthropes. These are people who seem to be eagerly awaiting the collapse of industrial civilization and don’t want to hear about any technological solutions. They have a certain intellectual kinship with this guy:<BR/><BR/>http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article3677129.ece<BR/><BR/>The leader of a Russian doomsday sect has attempted to kill himself as his followers continue to emerge from a cave where they have been waiting for the end of the world. <BR/>Pyotr Kuznetsov was in hospital yesterday after he was discovered hitting himself over the head with a log. Members of his religious group have been hiding in a cave since November, believing that the world would end in May. (London Times).Yogihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04251205351977033460noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post-54012822589662428452008-04-07T18:06:00.000-05:002008-04-07T18:06:00.000-05:00I don't think we have evidence of a cooling trend....I don't think we have evidence of a cooling trend. Arctic ices is still retreating.Charles Bartonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01125297013064527425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post-73770181003530739972008-04-07T16:50:00.000-05:002008-04-07T16:50:00.000-05:00A decade of cooling could be seen as possible scie...A decade of cooling could be seen as possible scientific evidence of something that is not Global Warming.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com