http://landartgenerator.org/blagi/wp-con...
Nuclear power is a non-starter. It is not environmentalists, it is finding enough areas where people feel safe with a plant/terrorism-target near by. Environmentalists oppose nuclear power primarily because of what the rest of the public does not see, the waste hidden away in some other place. But the plant locations require enough moms in an area feeling safe to raise kids there, and enough business not worried about potential good employees being chased away. Regardless of whether or not a good solution, it will not happen in 15 years
The fact that photovoltaic cells have come down so much changes a lot, but we still need an economical means of storing solar power to do without nuclear power, especially if we want to fight global warming.
we love crbon
As per today's NY Times article? ( http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/09/business/blueprints-for-taming-the-climate-crisis.html ):
"The new assessment suggests that deep decarbonization can be done without breaking any economy."
How realistic is that after 30 years of delay and inaction, and when it sooner or later becomes absolutely clearly impossible due to still further delay and inaction, will the deniers who have lied about climate science for those 30+ years be held to account?
The website of Jeffrey Sach's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Sachs UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network, whose assessment is referenced is "temporarily unavailable or too busy" so itid impossible to go there (right now at least) to check details / background of the report. Maybe this inaccessibility is because denialist blogs have swamped the site so that they can BS about it without being immediately ridiculed? Or maybe UNSDS has shut itself down to slow the swarm of copy-cat deniers?
