Comments on: Energy policy – substance wins over style

By: CJAB

CJAB — Fri, 15 Mar 2013 00:01:28 +0000

PDF of final paper available here

By: jmdesp

jmdesp — Wed, 06 Feb 2013 13:45:29 +0000

Well then we should first create those alternative sources of power that work at large scale, and next shut down nuclear.
Maybe every time we’ve added 1GW of those sources, shut down 1 GW of nuclear.

Instead the Japanese have shut down about all nuclear, are currently burning very large amount of oil to replace it, and today the main plan of their companies is to replace that by burning a lot of gas instead (didn’t wonder why there was so many Japanese inside the Algerian gas extraction plant that had been attacked ?)

By: TT

TT — Wed, 06 Feb 2013 01:31:16 +0000

It is curious that damage to the Fukushima nuclear reactors, which hasn’t killed anyone yet (as far as I know), is known as the Fukushima nuclear disaster. Whereas, the earthquake, which killed about 20,000 people as well as damaging the reactors, is more neutrally named the 2011 Tohoku earthquake.

Somehow drowning must be worse than being irradiated.

By: Craig Morley

Craig Morley — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 19:42:02 +0000

One possible good outcome of moving to this policy is that the Japanese will become even more inventive towards developing alternative sources of power, whereas, until now they haven’t been that proactive because they had nuclear power. Who knows this might actually spurr on some great research opportunities, although I must also confess that I do agree with the authors in principle re bioldiversity loss if they cannot find a half decent alternative.

By: Energy Policy – substance wins over style « BraveNewClimate

Energy Policy – substance wins over style « BraveNewClimate — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 07:01:27 +0000

[...] Sanghyun Hong, Corey J.A. Bradshaw, Barry W. Brook (co-published simultaneously on ConservationBytes.com) [...]