A large number of the scientists who are part of the IPCC (Intergovernmental panel on climate change) are ready to recommend that global warming can be addressed by the development of more nuclear energy, development of genetically altered crops to create biofuels, and underground capture and storage of carbon dioxide. A link to the article is Here.
I wonder if environmentalists in Minnesota would be willing to accept more nuclear power reactors to deal with the global warming problem, which they claim is near the point of being irreversible? The same scientists that proponents rely upon to prove that global warming is a problem, believe that nuclear energy is an acceptable solution.
The alternative (to carbon producing) energy possibilities mentioned certainly are interesting ideas in helping to address the problem. We would, obviously, be irresponsible if we didn’t take a careful look at the varied (scientific, social, ecological, economic, etc.) implications of any solution contributions before jumping headfirst into the bandwagon on any of them.
Of course that would require open-minded debate and assessment of all of the available information — not just those that support a single viewpoint. And if a Republican Senator from Northfield can’t do that (as we can see in these posts), how indeed can we expect environmentalists to do so?
Of course, I am one of those crazy pragmatists that hears the vast majority of climate experts saying there is an overwhelming likely hood (I think the current number is 90%) that we are causing a change that will have dramatic ecological, social, and economic impacts on the entire world and thinks, boy, we might want to see what we can do about that. At the same time, I think about a whole country/world getting behind a common vision that requires major technological advances and recall that, in the past, these periods have been accompanied by tremendous economic growth. Essentially, I see a big reason to do something and little financial reason not to.
I do believe nuclear power to be an acceptable solution to global warming, but it cannot be the only one; it’s among many. There are a few problems that need to be addressed when condoning the use of nuclear power, but we know it has the potential help reduce our emission of greenhouse gases.
The Working Group III, which deals with mitigating the effects of global warming, has released a summary for policymakers on their contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report by the IPCC. It is among many insightful resources that review possible developments that Minnesota, other states, and other nations could adopt for creating a better place for our children.