Quote:
Originally Posted by contracycle
... we would then need top embark on a crash-building programme on a scale something like a full scale military mobilisation to get them up fast enough, which is pretty much saying it Ain't Gonna Happen.
|
Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't that exactly what's necessary if the advocates of anthropomorphic climate change are correct? Do we not need exactly that kind of approach to deal with the issue?
If you had read the thread with care, you would have noticed that nuclear power is not "it." I'm arguing that the correct approach is to base the solution *around* nuclear power.
I'd like to see hydrogen powered road transport,
maglev rail, separated passenger and freight rail,
CargoCap goods delivery, further research into fusion, etc. I want to see the end of hydrocarbon based fuels completely - but for reasons of air quality and technological and economic advancement, rather than climate change.
Financing this kind of development, by the way, is easy. Currency issued and invested in these kind of infrastructure projects is non-inflationary, as opposed to the current central bank policy of issuing currency for the sole purpose of bailing out failed banks, which is highly inflationary. As I said earlier in the thread, this is exactly the approach taken in the 1930s by Roosevelt, and in the last few years by Putin. It works.