[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Nuclear Power Des NOT Need Gobal Warming Hoax!
Data at www.oism.org/pp and www.co2science.org lists a 17,000 scientist
petition proclaiming the non-threat of global warming and the benefit from
MORE CO2.
Do not abandon science to boost our maligned nuclear power industry.
Howard Long
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Jacobus" <crispy_bird@YAHOO.COM>
To: "Riely, Brian P." <brian.riely@ngc.com>; <John_Sukosky@DOM.COM>;
<radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>
Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 12:53 PM
Subject: RE: Only nuclear power can now halt global warming
> If I remember correctly, as glaciers melt, the
> landmass rises. Thus, there is a volume increase in
> the oceans as melted waters are added to it. Also,
> you analogy, does "not hold water." Water should be
> added to the glass as melting glaciers would add water
> to the oceans.
>
> I ran across this detailed study about glaciers
> http://www.tufts.edu/as/wright_center/fellows/zachfinal.pdf
>
> --- "Riely, Brian P." <brian.riely@ngc.com> wrote:
> > In the reference article, it states:
> > "...the melting of the Greenland ice sheet, which
> > will raise global sea levels significantly..."
> >
> > On a simplistic level, when a chuck of ice that is
> > floating in a glass of water melts, the water level
> > does not rise; so, why would the melting of the
> > Greenland ice sheet cause sea levels to rise
> > significantly everywhere. I can think of several
> > scenarios where the above would be true--for
> > example, the earth's surface has changed such that
> > the gravitational potential that initially held the
> > water in Greenland would no longer hold the
> > water--but they would be just made up stories. Does
> > anyone know the reason why professor Lovelock 's
> > statement is true?
> >
> > Brian
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John_Sukosky@DOM.COM
> > [mailto:John_Sukosky@DOM.COM]
> > Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 11:57 AM
> > To: radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu
> > Subject: Only nuclear power can now halt global
> > warming
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Maybe this will cause reasonable people to re-think
> > an unreasonable
> > position they may hold on nuclear power:
> >
> >
> http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/environment/story.jsp?story=524313
> >
> > Leading environmentalist urges radical rethink on
> > climate change
> > By Michael McCarthy Environment Editor
> > 24 May 2004
> >
> >
> > Global warming is now advancing so swiftly that only
> > a massive expansion of
> > nuclear power as the world's main energy source can
> > prevent it overwhelming
> > civilisation, the scientist and celebrated Green
> > guru, James Lovelock,
> > says.
> >
> > His call will cause huge disquiet for the
> > environmental movement. It has
> > long considered the 84-year-old radical thinker
> > among its greatest heroes,
> > and sees climate change as the most important issue
> > facing the world, but
> > it has always regarded opposition to nuclear power
> > as an article of faith.
> > Last night the leaders of both Greenpeace and
> > Friends of the Earth rejected
> > his call.
> >
> > Professor Lovelock, who achieved international fame
> > as the author of the
> > Gaia hypothesis, the theory that the Earth keeps
> > itself fit for life by the
> > actions of living things themselves, was among the
> > first researchers to
> > sound the alarm about the threat from the greenhouse
> > effect.
> >
> > He was in a select group of scientists who gave an
> > initial briefing on
> > climate change to Margaret Thatcher's Conservative
> > Cabinet at 10 Downing
> > Street in April 1989.
> >
> > He now believes recent climatic events have shown
> > the warming of the
> > atmosphere is proceeding even more rapidly than the
> > scientists of the UN's
> > Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
> > thought it would, in their
> > last report in 2001.
> >
> > On that basis, he says, there is simply not enough
> > time for renewable
> > energy, such as wind, wave and solar power - the
> > favoured solution of the
> > Green movement - to take the place of the coal, gas
> > and oil-fired power
> > stations whose waste gas, carbon dioxide (CO2), is
> > causing the atmosphere
> > to warm.
> >
> > He believes only a massive expansion of nuclear
> > power, which produces
> > almost no CO2, can now check a runaway warming which
> > would raise sea levels
> > disastrously around the world, cause climatic
> > turbulence and make
> > agriculture unviable over large areas. He says fears
> > about the safety of
> > nuclear energy are irrational and exaggerated, and
> > urges the Green movement
> > to drop its opposition.
> >
> > In today's Independent, Professor Lovelock says he
> > is concerned by two
> > climatic events in particular: the melting of the
> > Greenland ice sheet,
> > which will raise global sea levels significantly,
> > and the episode of
> > extreme heat in western central Europe last August,
> > accepted by many
> > scientists as unprecedented and a direct result of
> > global warming.
> >
> > These are ominous warning signs, he says, that
> > climate change is speeding,
> > but many people are still in ignorance of this.
> > Important among the reasons
> > is "the denial of climate change in the US, where
> > governments have failed
> > to give their climate scientists the support they
> > needed".
> >
> > He compares the situation to that in Europe in 1938,
> > with the Second World
> > War looming, and nobody knowing what to do. The
> > attachment of the Greens to
> > renewables is "well-intentioned but misguided", he
> > says, like the Left's
> > 1938 attachment to disarmament when he too was a
> > left-winger.
> >
> > He writes today: "I am a Green, and I entreat my
> > friends in the movement to
> > drop their wrongheaded objection to nuclear energy."
> >
> > His appeal, which in effect is asking the Greens to
> > make a bargain with the
> > devil, is likely to fall on deaf ears, at least at
> > present.
> >
> > "Lovelock is right to demand a drastic response to
> > climate change," Stephen
> > Tindale, executive director of Greenpeace UK, said
> > last night. "He's right
> > to question previous assumptions.
> >
> > "But he's wrong to think nuclear power is any part
> > of the answer. Nuclear
> > creates enormous problems, waste we don't know what
> > to do with; radioactive
> > emissions; unavoidable risk of accident and
> > terrorist attack."
> >
> > Tony Juniper, director of Friends of the Earth,
> > said: "Climate change and
> > radioactive waste both pose deadly long-term
> > threats, and we have a moral
> > duty to minimise the effects of both, not to choose
> > between them."
> >
> >
> > John M. Sukosky, CHP
> > Dominion
> > Surry Power Station
> > (757)-365-2594 (Tieline: 8-798-2594)
************************************************************************
You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To
unsubscribe, send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the
text "unsubscribe radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail,
with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe archives at
http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/