Not too long ago, we reviewed a report that looked at nuclear energy (and other energy sources) as biodiversity agents. This had to do, in part, with the amount of land a facility needs to function. Nuclear energy and fossil fuel plants use relatively little, wind farms and solar arrays quite a lot of land . Based on an objective and transparent analysis of our sustainable energy choices, we have come to the evidence-based conclusion that nuclear energy is a good option for biodiversity conservation (and society in general) and that other alternatives to fossil fuels should be subjected to the same cost–benefit analyses (in terms of biodiversity and climate outcomes, as well as sociopolitical imperatives) before accepting or dismissing them. Writer Barry Brook, who collected 75 scientists to endorse his paper, is interested in land use as it impacts flora and fauna. Biodiversity concerns do not get as much play as they might – and, when they do, it annoys many when land is withdraw...
Comments
There once was a president named Bush
Who hurried to war in a rush
His latest decision
Is safe nuclear fission
He’s talking right out of his tush!
There once was a fool who said oil
Has definitely gone off of the boil
We must rather go "newkular"
For a safe and clean future
And poison the air, water and soil.
There once was a moron from Maine
Who made a preposterous claim,
He said nuclear fission
Was his number one mission
To keep us safe, healthy and sane.
There was a goofball named Gunter,
Who was simply a one-note wonder.
He hates everything nuke,
Which proves he's a kook.
In this we can't be any blunter!
Gunter says nukes are bad.
But in their place he has nothing to add.
Wind and solar miss the mark.
Gunter freezes in the dark.
But perhaps that isn't so bad!!
So let's raise a dirge for old Paul,
He really hasn't a clue at all.
Nukes will clean up the air,
For the environment we'll care.
With clean energy at low cost for all!!!
(See, others can use exclamation points too.)