Friday, April 16, 2010

Debate: "Can the US confront global warming without adding more nuclear power?"

I have voted NO for the reason that the US needs more reliable base-load electricity generation such as provided by nuclear and coal-fired power stations, if it wants to further its economic development.

The alternative, which is not to do so, will inevitably lead to economic stagnation and decline. The US will then no longer be the world leader in technological development, although its military power will remain substantial, but ineffective.

Historically, it seems that some privileged nation states have their day in the sun and inevitably decline from being "top dog" for a certain period. For example we have the Roman Empire (ca 100 AD) and the British Empire in the recent past. The USA has been a powerful world leader since the end of World War 2, but its future dominance is doubtful.

The reason for the present decline of US world influence can be ascertained by examining the Helium title "Can the US confront global warming without adding more nuclear power".
Continue ... here