The green dilemma...

...revolves around the provision of safe, secure, cheap energy supplies. The fundamentalist red/greens (the ideological force behind the green church,) hate the idea of abundant, cheap and safe energy, hence their laughable and ludicrous "precautionary principle" . Their vision of humankind is that we are all programmable socialist robots at best, at worst a cancer on mother earth. However, deeper thinkers within the green and Labour movements see green socialism/nihilism as an albatross around their collective necks. For example, Tom Harris UK Labour MP, writes on his blog... for some...environmentalists the fight against global warming has another aim: the defeat of capitalism, of economic growth, of prosperity.Which is why I find their arguments so nauseating...(Tom, which green/left faction is the most "progressive" ?)

The differentiating point between red/green socialists and genuine environmentalists is their respective attitude to nuclear energy. Within the left, the argument has forced an ideological split. In Germany the Fundi's hate the pro-nuclear Realo's leading to a dysfunctional environmental movement. On the blogosphere the war rages on... Check this out and the entertaining comments/argument after it...

...Modern reactors are incredibly safe, with physics-based 'passive' safety systems requiring no user-operated or mechanical control to shut down the reaction. Indeed, a certification assessment for the 'Generation III+' Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR) put the risk of a core meltdown as severe as the one which occurred at Three Mile Island (TMI) in 1979 at once every 29 million years. For reference, the TMI incident resulted in no deaths. Similarly, comparing the inherently unsafe Chernobyl reactor design to an ESBWR is a bit like comparing an army revolver to a water gun. Fast spectrum reactors, also known as 'Generation IV', are able to use 99.5 per cent of the energy in uranium. There is enough energy in already-mined uranium and stored plutonium from existing stockpiles to supply all the world's power needs for over a century before we even need to mine any more uranium. Once we do start mining again, there is enough energy in proven uranium deposits to supply the entire world for at least 50,000 years. Fast reactors can be used to burn all existing reserves of plutonium and the waste stream of the past and present generation of thermal reactors...more here...