Carr thinks nuclear

So this is what we get for campaigning against coal fired power stations. Yeh – if it were likely to be a balanced debate, this might be a worthwhile proposal. Because nuclear wouldn’t win the debate!

We have to get out of this mindset that one technology, one thing will solve the problem. WWF promotes (PDF) a mix of clean energy solutions that will create the base load power we need.

I, personally, am willing to concede that nuclear may be an option in some circumstances. To that end debate is needed. However, what seems to be lacking from the media attention around nuclear lately is that, to go nuclear we will also require significant investment – not just on building and maintaining the stations, but in research and development.

If this is the case, why is it that we are not spending this money on safer alternatives, that don’t have the potentially disastrous effects of nuclear – both in terms of waste and the potential for damage? IMO, it beggars belief.

I’m sick of old fart politicians, through short sightedness and ignorance, fucking up the environment that we, and our children, will inherit. I sure hope that common sense prevails in this particular issue.

  • As usual, there’s probably a lot more to this than Bob Carr just dreaming this option up. Gotta wonder who from the pro-nuclear lobby has spoken to him in the last few weeks…

    I for one, am not as optimistic about our ability to successfully harness nuclear power. There are just far too many examples of scientists thinking they’ve got the universe sussed and then finding our some terrible and unforseen side-effect. Better to stick to basics until we really understand what we’re messing with.

Comments are closed.