Ludi wrote:FoT, can you list out the specific problems you would like to see addressed in a solution? Monte listed out the problems he would like to see addressed in a solution.
It’s quite simple. It must address global warming and it must not unduly exacerbate the economic (and related social, political etc) fallout of Peak Oil. The “solution” must be a graduated detox – not a rapid “cleansing”.
Monte believes expanding nuclear power will make things worse – that it’ll (as he posted a few pages ago) “delay the correction” – with the inference being that ultimately things will be worse. I find this a rather peculiar assertion because Monte is one of the most prolific posters about the severity of the Peak Oil issues coming down the pipe. In order for the rollout of nuclear to “delay the correction”, business would have to continue as normal, and that clearly goes against all of the other assertions (many of them very well made) in his other posts.
Let us all be very clear about what the ramifications are of not pursuing nuclear energy. The odds of us
ever transitioning to any sort of a sustainable lifestyle are greatly reduced. Why? Because the larger the energy deficit, the worse the economic fallout, the worse the resultant social fallout, the political fallout, etc. etc. The more stress placed on us, the more likely we will be to act in desperation.
I cannot for the life of me figure out how that obvious fact is being ignored.