By Michael Karnerfors, 2010-06-15
A common argument against nuclear power is this:
"We don't actually need nuclear power, because we could potentially use other clean sources of energy".
I am not going to argue against that particular statement, because it is true. We could potentially rid ourselves of nuclear power and have clean energy from other sources.
There are a few implications and practical matters that must be addressed though. So let's take this kind of reasoning a few steps further. What other areas is this statement true for? What more could we potentially be without?

Do we actually need any of these?
We do not need nuclear power
Tuesday, June 15th, 2010A common argument against nuclear power is this:
"We don't actually need nuclear power, because we could potentially use other clean sources of energy".
I am not going to argue against that particular statement, because it is true. We could potentially rid ourselves of nuclear power and have clean energy from other sources.
There are a few implications and practical matters that must be addressed though. So let's take this kind of reasoning a few steps further. What other areas is this statement true for? What more could we potentially be without?
Do we actually need any of these?
(more...)
Tags: AIDS, checks and balances, energy, freedom of speech, HIV, law enforement, laws, measles, menigitis, need, nuclear power, police, polio, seat beltm, separation of power, vaccine
Posted in Bad Science, Commentary, English | 2 Comments »