AndyH wrote:Recent polls have found that more than 80 percent of French voters now object to building new nuclear plants, and nearly two-thirds support phasing out existing plants.
Those poll numbers may have played a role in the decision by France’s opposition Socialists to support a plan by the smaller Green Party to close almost half of the country’s 58 nukes by 20-25. Socialist presidential candidate François Hollande told France 2 TV that while he doesn’t want to eliminate nuclear power, he does want to diversify the country’s electricity sources.
This would be at odds with the ~70% electricity coming from nukes in France. I guess the reasonable approach in France will be to phase them out slowly. Lets assume that is what most people want. How they are going to replace ~30% of their power production with Co2 neutral technology in less than 15 years will be exciting to see.
Seriously, I am convinced renewables can eventually provide 100% of our needs (even when the sun does not shine, provided all those old Leaf batteries are put to good use as power storage devices), but this would need a concentrated effort...probably a few magnitudes bigger than the Apollo project. Since this is not happening short-to-mid term, we need something to keep us powered in the meantime. Preferably something without Co2 emissions.
Since you have no problems getting conservatives/climate change deniers on board for nukes, why not use them, while we work on a better solution. As the effects of global warming become visible, even to the mentally challenged, the political climate is guaranteed to move in favor of renewables. Once the technology is cheap and everyone wants it, we can phase out nuclear fission power.
Fusion, on the other hand, is something we, as a civilization, should pursue, because that is the stuff that will propel us to the stars eventually.
People are actually pretty smart - and they're waking up. Both are good things, Coppertop!
I am not sure that is true....lets hope for the best.