Why Should the Developing World NOT Be Encouraged to Develop?


I am about to buy a book called “Aim High” on Kindle and I read the book summary:

Aim High proposes using thorium energy to address environmental problems. Mankind’s fossil fuel burning releases CO2 into the atmosphere, contributing to global warming and deadly air pollution. Natural resources are rapidly being depleted by world population growth. Safe, inexpensive energy from the liquid fluoride thorium reactor can stop much global warming and raise prosperity of humanity to adopt US and OECD lifestyles, which include lower, sustainable birth rates. Thorium fuel is transformed to uranium-233 which fissions, producing heat and electric power at a cost less than that from coal power plants–the only way to dissuade developing nations from burning coal. Thorium produces less than 1% of the long-lived radioactive waste of today’s nuclear power plants. Existing nuclear power plant waste can be consumed. One ton of plentiful thorium costing $300,000 provides 1 GW-year of electric energy, enough for a city. A 5-year NASA-style shoot-the-moon project can complete technology development of this inexpensive, safe, clean power.

As any reader here knows, I am pretty much up on the thorium LFTR power plant subject.

One passage (in bold) in this summary caught my attention and made me ask the question in the post title.

One way to make a Liberal squirm is to catch him/her in a conundrum between their encouragement of the downtrodden and their fervent desire into not have any more CO2 enter the atmosphere.  Since they believe that any development of third world countries is fraught with increases to global. this makes some sense.

However, when (not if) thorium reactors begin coming online, all that will change. As they spread around the globe energy will come without any CO2 signature.

What will they think then?  Will they stop being conflicted?  Will they still think more energy use means something bad?

Will many of them be exposed as anti-industry as opposed to anti-CO2?

I am actually betting that the anti-industry folks WILL be caught with their pants down.  They won’t have CO2 to beat up on anymore.  But then they will just shift into some OTHER anti-industry crusade.

Trust me, folks, it isn’t CO2 that they are targeting; it is industry.  If they don’t have CO2 they will find something else about industry to attack.

They will continue being against anything petroleum, of course.  So that suggests that they will rail against anything and everything plastic, petroleum’s other industry.

This brings up some of the history of activism that I was aware of.  I will cover that in the next post – Past Activist Naughtinesses that Didn’t Make it Very Far.

Advertisements

One response to “Why Should the Developing World NOT Be Encouraged to Develop?

  1. The article about thorium is interesting and maybe hopeful, ( I’m almost afraid to hope) but couldn’t you omit the little jabs at “liberals” and stick to the scientific facts without the political speculation?. It’s unnecessarily polarizing. What if this idea were embraced by people at all points on the political spectrum? How bad could that be? Your paranoia is showing, which makes me sad.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s