Another world climate conference in an exotic remote location, another hundred or so airplane tankfuls of kerosene turned into carbon dioxide (CO2) and dumped into the atmosphere—all in the name of getting together to talk about how not to dump so much CO2 into the atmosphere. Is that how the Durban conference will go down in history?
Looking at the media coverage of Durban, and it looks that way. I have said before and I’ll say it here again: the only way to rationally deal with climate change is through technology, and the only immediately deployable technology that can produce large-scale CO2 reductions is nuclear energy.
If nuclear energy is not front and centre on the agenda as the number one technological answer to climate change, then talking about climate change is essentially a waste of time.
Is nuclear energy on the Durban agenda? At the plenary level, yes. At the world-conversation level, well type “Durban nuclear energy” into your favourite search engine and find out.
I totally agree. Now how do we raise awareness and rally more people like students to be aware of the main points like energy density of nuclear energy, the number of coal plants in the US and China and how renewables could never catch up to coal production levels without bankrupting and ruining much of the planets habitat? We need the best PR firms working on how to present nuclear energy in a friendly way. I’ve educated myself and I’m just a musician. I think others can do the same if they really care about the future.
At the previous conferences they took nuclear off the table at the pre-conference meetings, so it didn’t even get considered. And with this being the first conference post-Fukushima, it’s highly doubtful that nuclear will be considered this time. As you said, without nuclear on the table these conferences are a waste of time. More’s the pity, because they provide an illusion of progress when what we really need is action.