Possible Significant Changes in Political Environmentalism

[Aristotle]

This is a really interesting article written by Stewart Brand, a famous environmentalist who cofounded The Well, one of the first electronic communities.

The article addresses a number of "sacred cow" that he believes environmentalists will change their views on.


http://www.technologyreview.com/arti...ture_earth.asp


I found this one really interesting:

Can climate change be slowed and catastrophe avoided? They can to the degree that humanity influences climate dynamics. The primary cause of global climate change is our burning of fossil fuels for energy.

So everything must be done to increase energy efficiency and decarbonize energy production. Kyoto accords, radical conservation in energy transmission and use, wind energy, solar energy, passive solar, hydroelectric energy, biomass, the whole gamut. But add them all up and it’s still only a fraction of enough. Massive carbon “sequestration” (extraction) from the atmosphere, perhaps via biotech, is a widely held hope, but it’s just a hope. The only technology ready to fill the gap and stop the carbon dioxide loading of the atmosphere is nuclear power.

...

The environmental movement has a quasi-religious aversion to nuclear energy. The few prominent environmentalists who have spoken out in its favor—Gaia theorist James Lovelock, Greenpeace cofounder Patrick Moore, Friend of the Earth Hugh Montefiore—have been privately anathematized by other environmentalists. Public excoriation, however, would invite public debate, which so far has not been welcome.

[Grantref]

I'd be all for nuclear power if the government didn't show such monumental disregard for the real danger that the waste represents.