Group Takes 'Strong Exception' to New Nuke Recommendation
Source: Hampton-North Hampton Patch
Hundreds of U.S. and international environmental and clean energy groups including Seacoast Anti-Pollution League say that, while they respect the climate change work of former NASA climate scientist Dr. James Hansen and three colleagues, take strong exception to their widely-reported notion that nuclear power is the solution to global warming. Dr. Hanson, who has spoken to state legislators about climate impacts at the NH State House, has become an outspoken advocate of nuclear power, despite widespread criticism of that approach and the almost total collapse of the much-touted “nuclear renaissance” in this country in recent years.
A joint letter from more than 311 groups – including 237 from 46 U.S. states and the District of Columbia and 74 from 44 other nations around the globe – is being issued in response to a widely circulated November 3, 2013 statement from Dr. Hansen and three of his academic world colleagues, Ken Caldeira, Kerry Emanuel, and Tom Wigley. In that statement Hansen and the others voiced their advocacy for increased reliance on nuclear power, an industry plagued by financial, technical and safety issues for more than 50 years.
“We think the public needs to know that while these scientists are leaders in their field of climatology, they have no corresponding expertise in nuclear engineering or energy policy, and their opinions have much less bearing on current reality or future power production prospects,” said Doug Bogen, executive director of Seacoast Anti-Pollution League. “In fact, with recent reversals in nuclear power production in this country and other complications, it remains to be seen whether nuclear power will play much of any role in supplying power in this country past the first few decades of this century, let alone serve as a serious solution to the climate crisis.”
<snip>
CSI Senior Energy Analyst Grant Smith said: “We can admire the important work of Dr. Hansen on climate change, which is his area of expertise, while disagreeing with his advocacy of nuclear power. In the face of a clear need for swift action on climate change, there is nothing about nuclear power that resembles a solution that can be put into place quickly, much less in a safe and affordable fashion. Indeed, Dr. Hansen and his colleagues tout so-called ‘advanced’ nuclear technology, which is nothing more than regurgitated attempts by the industry to bring tried-and-failed alternative designs such as expensive and dangerous breeder reactors to commercialization. We have clean, affordable, safe, reliable and proven solutions available to us. These safe and clean sources can be brought to scale creating an electric grid that relies much more heavily on increased energy efficiency, variable wind and solar photovoltaic, distributed power, demand response and storage technologies. This energy path can reduce greenhouse gas emissions much more quickly, cost-effectively and safely than any nuclear option. The markets are responding and there is clear evidence that they are catalyzing an unprecedented technological revolution in the power sector.”
<snip>
Read more: http://hampton-northhampton.patch.com/groups/politics-and-elections/p/seacoast-antipollution-league-local-group-takes-strong-exception-to-new-nuke-recommendation
The statement is at http://www.civilsocietyinstitute.org/media/010814release.cfm
The letter is at http://www.nirs.org/climate/background/hansenletter1614.pdf
Another climate scientist fooled by nuclear industry PR was Barry Brook, who stated with gullible certainty:
I am happy to be quoted forever after on the above if I am wrong… but I won’t be.
- Barry Brook, on 12 March 2011 at 1:55 PM
http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/03/12/japan-nuclear-earthquake/#comment-113871
How does a scientist become so certain of something so wrong, something which is outside his field of expertise?
How can a scientists beliefs become so corrupted by nuclear industry PR and lies?
This is important - the nuclear industry not only corrupts politics, it also corrupts science.
You just can't trust the nuclear industry.
