Iceland Review is running a Q&A with CASEnergy's Patrick Moore today. Here's an excerpt:
EW: You left Greenpeace in 1986. Why leave what was perhaps the first environmental organization with clout?Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Power, Electricity, Environment, Energy, Technology, Politics, Patrick Moore
PM: I left because I saw my colleagues abandoning science and logic and adopting zero-tolerance policies that made no sense. In many ways, Greenpeace is now promoting policies that are environmentally negative. Genetically modified crops reduce pesticide use; nuclear energy reduces greenhouse gas emissions; sustainable forestry produces the most abundant renewable material; aquaculture produces healthy oils and protein, and takes pressure off the wild stocks.
Comments
Wait, I thought he was a paid consultant for NEI and the lead pro-nuclear spokesperson?
Didn't I read somewhere that you have to have a nuclear engineering degree before NEI will consider you know something about nuclear power?
Guess he should be dumped from the speakers' roster until he collects that little ole nuke engineering degree, eh?
We're waiting.
Well, I guess that I'll have to stop posting comments here on this blog. I've never taken a nuclear engineering class in my life.
Eric? David? How about you guys?
If you could point out where you read that it would be great. We have people at NEI and at nuclear plants who are mecahnical engineers, electrical engineers, software engineers, health physicists, mathematicians and statisticians. So no, you don't have to have a "nuclear engineering degree before NEI will consider you know something about nuclear power."
These celebrities (many of whom have no more than a high-school education) should demonstrate that they actually understand the technology and issues that they are talking about. Certainly, this does not require a nuclear engineering degree, but we should expect something more than just parroting something that they got from Greenpeace, NDRS, etc.
Otherwise, why should we take them more seriously than a lawyer or a PR guy for Big Oil, Big Tobacco, etc.? Sure, they have a prettier face (sometimes) and we've seen them more often on the big screen or the TV, but other than that, what do they bring to the discussion?
To criticize Dr. Moore (who actually does have a doctorate) seems disingenuous, to say the least.
Oh ... by the way ... the more "media savvy" you get, the more the opposition can claim that you are merely a bunch of PR guys who have sold your souls to the devil. (As if the NDRS guys weren't nothing but PR guys ... advocacy is all they do). No thanks. I would prefer just to express my honest opinions the way that I see them.
Unfortunately, because of its own success, nuclear energy is going to be grouped with oil companies, wars over oil, evil (C02 producing) coal companies, whatever ... It's part of the establishment, and therefore a target in that respect.
Thus, straight talk, rather than gloss and spin, gets you father in promoting its benefits.
I understand what you are saying, and you are right -- honest opinions are called for, more than anything else. I agree.
"Okay Gunter, now we know you have no nuclear engineering background. Does anyone at NIRS have a nuclear engineering degree? I'm really curious now...
At 8:59 AM, Kirk Sorensen said...
http://www.nirs.org/about/staff.htm
Hmm, here's the NIRS staff page...don't see any nuclear engineering degrees. Italian literature, environmental science, biology, but no nuclear engineering.
Wait, I thought this was called the "Nuclear Information and Resource Service"???
Where's the people who actually know something about nuclear energy to share?"
"By the way, what does NDRS stand for?"
For the answer to that, you'll have to go back to May.
Besides, it was actually Commissioner Edward McGaffigan who made that "error" in the full name of this anti-nuclear organization. It wasn't me. I repeated it.
Wait a minute ... that sounds familiar ... Let's go back to May:
COMMISSIONER MCGAFFIGAN: Then you go to Illinois and you use factoids or made-up facts or irrelevant facts in order to try to condition the public to -- and to spur fear in the public. You yourself have done that. I mean, you yourself go and do this placenta thing, and you --
MR. GUNTER: It was actually Dr. Arjun Makhajani who made that -- ... And also an obstetrician made that statement. It wasn't me. I repeated it.
Ahh ... no wonder it sounds familiar. So, I guess, by Mr. Gunter's standards, I'm vindicated.