More Sense From Potential Energy

I wish more folks wrote like Gia Milinovich:

Yes, we need to cut carbon emissions, yes, we need to cut down on pollution, yes, we need to help developing nations do the same thing … but "conserve"” energy? Nope. Not for one second.

The problem isn'’t the energy usage, the problem is the waste produced from the production of that energy.

If we decide to only use "‘renewable" energy sources - hydro, solar, wind- we will, no question about it, have to conserve massive amounts of energy in order to even have a chance of making that work. None of those energy production methods produce anywhere near the amount of energy we need to continue to thrive as a society. Even if 50% of our energy usage comes from renewables, we still need to get the rest from somewhere.

No one has given me any reason to think that nuclear should not be part of the energy production mix. Equally, no one has given me any reason to think that "‘renewables"’ should not be part of the mix. Both, together, will hopefully allow us to advance as a species and keep the planet'’s balance.

Gia writes at Potential Energy, a blog set up by the U.K.'s Institute of Physics to debate the nuclear question. When the blog launched in May, they promised to elevate the level of debate on the subject, and they've by and large been successful.

Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Power, Energy, Technology, Environment, Electricity