Norway Begins Four Year Test Of Thorium Nuclear Reactor

[GliderGuider]

9. Do you think a solution is possible?

Before the planet hits +4C, I mean?

I know there are a lot of attractive, interesting and potentially useful things that can be done to reduce carbon emissions. There are also some ugly, horrifying, probably useless things that should not be done. And then there are things that will make precious little difference, but might have value in other aspects of the human experience.

It seems to me that in order to decide which camp a given idea falls into, one must understand what the issues are, what the problem is we're trying to address. Each of us sorts the ideas differently according to our belief systems.

That's where the pro and anti-nuclear debate comes from. My views are, to some extent, a product of that debate. I started off being fairly neutral about the issue. As I discovered and thought more about carbon I became strongly pro-nuclear for a while. Then when I realized the implications of having large numbers of nuclear reactors and large amounts of hazardous waste around during a social breakdown, I turned anti again. Now I've come to terms with the idea of an eventual breakdown of civilization, and I'm back to being fairly neutral about the technology itself while still thinking it's a bad idea to develop things like that.

To me the singular problem is carbon, but it's a trap that has already been sprung. We have put too much carbon into the atmosphere to be able to avoid a dangerous rise in temperature and dangerous acidification of the oceans. At the same time there are too many people alive now who are too dependent on carbon energy to allow us to turn that tap off. We got ourselves into this fix by being too clever by half, and I see all new forms of energy - whether it's thorium, windmills or PV panels - as being further manifestations of that cleverness. At the same time they are totally unable (for a number of reasons) to solve the root problem of our carbon-dependent civilization.

So I would prefer that we put our ingenuity to work addressing other issues than energy. Like experimenting with low-carbon activities such as permaculture, or better, faster computers, or encouraging people to think with their long-term minds instead of their short-term brains.

I think that those who will survive the coming turmoil and spread truly sustainable ideas into our traumatized future won't be gadget-heads. They will be those who build communities and develop new stories about what humanity is doing here and how we can cooperate instead of dominate each other and life in general.

I know that my beliefs about who we are, what we're doing, what is happening and why are extreme - especially in comparison to mainstream environmentalists. That's largely because I no longer buy the cultural story that man is the measure of all things, the arbiter of all value, and that everything we do should be judged only in relation to its impact on human beings. That, and the fact that I've traced the implications of observed human behaviour through to its logical conclusion, and have accepted what I found at the endpoint.

I think there's a place here for people with views like mine - after all, the board is for discussions about energy and environment issues, with no requirement that one should think the issues have solutions. I'd like to put my marks on this side of the ledger, in the hopes of stimulating deeper though about where we are, where we're going, and why. I know that's uncomfortable for people who are attached to the idea that every man-made problem must have a man-made solution. However, these are not comfortable times - they're times for deep reflection and deep honesty. IMHO.