You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Science & Technology
Green on Green
2006-10-02
Greens 'aid destruction of planet'
A leading scientist has warned that opposition to nuclear power by environmental campaigners is irrational as well as dangerously misguided
Environmental groups are setting back the fight against global warming with misguided and irrational objections to nuclear power, according to BritainÂ’s leading thinker about the future.
Climate change will be the greatest of many significant challenges for humanity over the next century, and every tool available, including nuclear energy, will be needed to prevent it wrecking the planet, James Martin told The Times.

While the anti-nuclear campaign is well-intentioned, it fundamentally misunderstands the safety of the latest generation of reactors and threatens to hold back a technology that could be critical to the worldÂ’s future, he said.

The criticism of groups such as Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth by Dr Martin, a computer scientist and physicist, will be keenly felt as he is himself a prominent green who has spent much of his large IT and publishing fortune on research into global warming and environmental science.

Last year, he donated £60 million to the University of Oxford to found the James Martin Institute for Science and Civilisation, the first school of its kind dedicated to studying problems of the future such as climate change and emerging technologies.

Though nuclear power generates very low carbon emissions, most green lobby groups are opposed to it because of the problem of disposing of waste that remains radioactive for thousands of years, and the risks of an accident.

In The Meaning of the 21st Century, his new book published today, he names climate change as the greatest challenge currently facing humanity, and openly endorses nuclear power as part of the solution.

The “fourth-generation” nuclear plants that could be built now are profoundly different from older designs, with safety features that make meltdown impossible, low waste output, and fuel that is not suitable for bombs, Dr Martin said.

He is keen on the pebble bed reactor, an experimental South African and Chinese design, in which the fuel is incapable of melting. A prototype has been built in Beijing. “With the pebble bed reactor, the fuel is easily disposed of, and it can be divorced absolutely from the bomb industry,” he said.

Green critics of nuclear power, he said, are delaying adoption of this technology.

“I think they are misguided. South Africa would have had a pebble bed reactor running by now if it hadn’t been for Greenpeace.”

His book sets out a number of grand challenges for the next 100 years. While the greatest of these is global warming, he also lists water shortages, which will lead to wars, the loss of global biodiversity, terrorism, diseases such as pandemic flu and HIV/Aids, and the emergence of biotechnology and artificial intelligence that could change the fundamental nature of humanity.

Nathan Argent, a Greenpeace spokesman, said: “While the fourth generation of reactors produce less waste by volume, they produce more of the most radioactive and long-lived waste, and there is still no safe way of dealing with this. We argue that the better way to tackle climate change is to decentralise power generation and make it more efficient.”

CHALLENGES FOR 21ST CENTURY

The environment: Global warming threatens to wreck the planet. Water is being used unsustainably and is running out. Animal and plant species are being wiped out.

War and terrorism: Weapons of mass destruction make it possible for humanity to wipe itself out. Terrorists are becoming more likely to gain access to these weapons. Both the means and causes of war need to be addressed, with measures to tackle nuclear proliferation, poverty and environmental inequality, especially access to water.

Transhumanism and the singularity: Genetic engineering, robotic implants and cognitive enhancement drugs will enable the transformation of the human species. Computer intelligence will improve to reach a “singularity” where it matches that of humans.

Wealth and lifestyle: Overall wealth should increase dramatically beyond inflation. There will be more leisure for more people, with opportunities for enhancing happiness. Population, though, will grow to 8.9 billion, and it will not be possible for all these people to enjoy sophisticated lifestyles.

Creativity and wisdom: Few people fulfil their creative potential. The pursuit of wealth and knowledge is often conducted without reflection on what this means for the future. “Science and technology are accelerating furiously, but wisdom is not,” Dr Martin writes.
Posted by:.com

#6  Yes, Daddy's path to riches and fame (he invented an enzyme or something that made DDT effective at orders of magnitude decreased usages levels) was cut off after only a year when Carson's "Silent Spring" came out. In his frustration he turned to cancer research, and discovered interferon. But he was forced into retirement before he could run the experiment series to demonstrate efficacy, so others got the prizes and magazine covers a decade later.
Posted by: trailing wife   2006-10-02 23:35  

#5  Don't forget how our aversion to 'nasty' predators and love for "Bambi" are causing us to drown in goose droppings. See Rantburg Article
Posted by: Bobby   2006-10-02 08:41  

#4  It's no secret that the enviro-wacko's policies have done and will continue to do great harm to the 'planet', and consequently, the people.

Wrap your mind around this one for example: DDT was demagogued and then banned for no good reason. In fact the 'environmental' movement used junk science, Rachel Carson's propaganda book 'Silent Spring', and incomplete and now discredited studies to ban DDT in order to increase their power and influence. EPA administrator Ruckelshaus banned it in 1972 after ignoring his own department's studies and the decision of his own administrative law judge. He didn't even read the EPA reports on DDT.

At what price? It's estimated that Malaria, for example, affects between 300 and 500 million people per year, with a resulting death toll of approximately 2.7 million. Most of these are children. DDT may have prevented more than two thirds of these deaths. If you do the math, using a conservative estimate, the ban on DDT has cost the world TWO MILLION UNNECESSARY DEATHS per year since it was banned.

2,000,000 X 34 Years = 68,000,000 people. That's more than all the deaths in World War II. These clowns could care less, because they worship the god of mother earth, and not the God who made man in his own image.
Posted by: mcsegeek1   2006-10-02 08:23  

#3  Global warming threatens to wreck the planet.

-Unproven that it exists beyond a statistical blip.

-Proven warming trends in the past during historical times were associated with wealth and development of arts and sciences. This squares with the word "wreck" only if you are an anticapitalist.

Water is being used unsustainably and is running out.

-Where, precisely, is it going? At least on the scale of centuries/millenia, water on the surface of earth is in a closed system. It can't run out.

Animal and plant species are being wiped out.

-Some extinctions are inevitable. That is how life changes over time. Are Bush and Halliburton responsible for the extinction of the trilobites and dinosaurs? If we save species which should have gone extinct, have we not tinkered to the overall detriment of the biosphere?

Terrorists are becoming more likely to gain access to these weapons.

-This is occuring precisely because people like this guy have turned their back on Western traditions and refuse to recognize that the solution is to project sufficient force to prevent said access.

Overall wealth should increase dramatically beyond inflation.

-And which economic system allows this to happen - collectivism, or capitalism?

Population, though, will grow to 8.9 billion, and it will not be possible for all these people to enjoy sophisticated lifestyles.

-NO economic system can GUARANTEE "sophisticated lifestyles" for everybody, but collectivist, highly regulatory ones guarantee that you create a society where the MINIMUM number of people have said lifestyles.

Few people fulfil their creative potential. The pursuit of wealth and knowledge is often conducted without reflection on what this means for the future. “Science and technology are accelerating furiously, but wisdom is not,” Dr Martin writes.

-This is just nuts. Never does it occur to this guy to wonder whether or not people WANT to fulfill their potential. It probably doesn't occur to him, either, that the way to encourage this isn't through the government forcing it to happen, but to set up a society where people can sink or swim, choose their vocations and avocations, and allow people the freedom to do this, without coercion to do so, so that everyone can find their own peace voluntarily.
Posted by: no mo uro   2006-10-02 07:23  

#2  This is the James Martin who got rich peddling obvious schlock to morons.

Back in the 80's when systems theory was little understood, he churned out 2 or 3 books a year detailing a paint-by-numbers approach to software development.

He had a great run until it dawned on people his stuff doesn't work.
Posted by: phil_b   2006-10-02 06:49  

#1  So does this mean "the Plan" is NOT to build SPACESHIPS/SPACE ARKS to transport humanity into deep space > you know, to save humanity from that Big, probably GOP-Conservative Fascist Meany THE SUN, + RIGHT-LEANING ASTEROIDS-COMETS-PLANET X's, whom won't listen to Lefty intellectuals and activists as to how to run its solar = space cycles. OWG NOW, D ** IT > TREASONOUS SUNBEAMS ARE EVERYWHERE.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2006-10-02 02:37  

00:00