Nuclear and Biofuels Discussed

Editor
As you read the two stories below you will notice environmental groups against nuclear and for biofuels. The govt. took the advice of the environmental groups when they implemented their renewable policies because of the pressure of the GREENS and their fear of losing elections. Reality and science, which up till now have been absent, are finally starting to move to the forefront of the debate. The only way to understand what is going on is to understand Agenda 21. The Greens want humanity thrown back to the middle ages. Make sure to check out Global Green Agenda
If you don’t like to read watch the movie Agenda 21 Explained

Nuclear plans attract fresh fire

France nuclear plant

France has already begun to build next generation reactors

Anti-nuclear groups have expressed their disappointment at reports that the UK is poised to join France in creating new nuclear generators. The Guardian newspaper reported that plans for the joint venture are to be announced when French President Nicolas Sarkozy visits the UK next week.

Friends of the Earth says developing nuclear technology was “nonsense” when it comes to tackling climate change.

Downing Street officials said they would not comment on the report.

Nuclear power is limited, dangerous and requires a lot of hi-tech skills to deal with the waste. By far the better technology is renewables
Friends of the Earth

According to the Guardian, the plan calls for the UK to tap into France’s nuclear expertise to create both a skilled workforce and technology that can be exported worldwide within the next 15 years.

Renewables

The paper says the UK is eager to come up with alternatives to fossil fuels.

But Friends of the Earth campaigner Neil Crumpton said: “The idea of selling nuclear power around the world as a solution to climate change is just nonsense.

“Nuclear power is limited, dangerous and requires a lot of hi-tech skills to deal with the waste. By far the better technology is renewables.”

Source BBC

Call for delay to biofuels policy

By Roger Harrabin
BBC Environment Analyst

Petrol pump nozzle

Ministers want 2.5% biofuels to be mixed in petrol at the pumps

The UK’s chief environment scientist has called for a delay to a policy demanding inclusion of biofuels into fuel at pumps across the UK.

Professor Robert Watson said ministers should await the results of their inquiry into biofuels’ sustainability.

Some scientists think biofuels’ carbon benefits may be currently outweighed by negative effects from their production.

The Renewable Transport Fuels Obligation (RTFO) is to introduce 2.5% biofuels at the pumps from 1 April.

Professor Robert Watson warned that it would be insane if the RTFO had the opposite effects of the ones intended.

He said biofuels policy in the EU and the UK may have run ahead of the science.

His comments in an interview with BBC Radio 4’s Today programme appear on the day when a coalition of pressure groups from Oxfam to Greenpeace writes to the Department for Transport (DfT) demanding that the policy be delayed until after the review.

Sustainability question

Professor Watson does not advise the DfT – and said his thoughts as chief environment scientist on the sustainability of biofuels had not been sought.

The DfT is itself under pressure from an EU policy demanding the inclusion of 5% biofuels in road fuels by 2010 in an attempt to cut carbon emissions.

The EU’s Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas earlier told BBC News that this target should only be reached if the biofuels could be proved to be sustainably produced.

It is impossible to say yet whether any biofuels are truly sustainable or not as they are blended on the world market and their origins are impossible to trace.

Some scientists believe some biofuels – particularly ethanol from sugar cane – should be seen as sustainable.

Serious concern

But others fear the impact of biofuels on food prices. And recent articles from US scientists argue that the carbon debt incurred from carbon released from ploughing virgin soil often outweighed any potential carbon saving from the biofuels.

Professor Watson said some of the calculations on soil science were controversial – but agreed that carbon losses from soil were a serious concern.

He said that the UK was a leader in exploring the full sustainability implications of biofuels.

This is certainly true compared with the US which has set numerical targets for biofuels without consideration of their carbon impact.

But many will question why energy experts promoting biofuels in the EU were allowed to go unchallenged so long by the views on biofuels of agriculture specialists or soil scientists.

Source BBC

The statement above rings true for wind farms as well. In fact the entire Global Warming Crisis has been allowed to run ahead of both science and reasonable debate. (added)

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , , ,

One Response to “Nuclear and Biofuels Discussed”

  1. Sam Rosenbloom Says:

    nuclear and biofuels are not necessarily two different things. Biofuel production requires a significant amount of energy usually in the form of low enthalpy steam, something nuclear plants produce very well. Cummulatively, U.S. ethanol plants consume natural gas on the order of the entire U.S. import of LNG. Nuclear technology could easily displace this NG. It doesn’t make much sense to burn fossil fuel or even biomass if all this burning could be displaced. I have written several articles about using nuclear energy to produce ethanol. Nuclear can also be used to produce ammonia and urea based fertilizer which is also based on NG. There are many synergies.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: