Do environmentalists contribute to global warming?
Nuclear power could wean us off coal, but fears about the technology have kept it down, says Patrick Moore, one of the founders of Greenpeace.
We could put a bigger dent in greenhouse gases, says Patrick Moore, if it weren't for environmentalists.
Expanding the use of nuclear power would let the U.S. and other nations reduce dependence on coal, one of the biggest producers of carbon dioxide and other pollutants (and industrial accidents). Nuclear plants emit virtually no greenhouse gases, and more plants would also give the green light to the electric car industry.
"They (environmentalists) are the ones who are screaming that the sky is falling and that the climate catastrophe is coming and it's going to be global and it's going to cause 40 to 50 percent of all the species to become extinct and it's going to be the end of civilization as we know it," he said in an interview with CNET News.com. "And yet, they are against nuclear energy just because there could be an accident somewhere. How could one nuclear accident be worse than the whole world being destroyed?"
But here's something about Moore's background. He is a co-founder of Greenpeace. After he left the organization, he began to think about climate change and is now a very public nuclear advocate. He even works with the Center for Sustainable Energy, a nuclear trade group.
And, he likes to point out, he's not alone. Environmentalists and scientists like Stewart Brand and Jared Diamond are also pro-nuclear. Still, there are issues with disposal.
Moore also looks at the political and safety issues surrounding nuclear. Check out the full interview here.