IrishPidge

Hey Kumi! Greenpeace and most of the broader environmental movement has long been opposed to nuclear fission, for reasons of safety, proliferation, grid integration etc.

Any thoughts on what GP's attitude is likely to be to potential future tech like nuclear fusion? Does any sort of nuclear reaction necessitate a negative response, or do you think changing tech leads to changing attitudes?

Arguably not. Some interesting work by Greenpeace on precisely that question done a few years ago for Europe. I think it might go a bit overboard by saying that RES is incompatible with baseload like coal/nuclear, but it certainly produces a working, tested model of how a zero-baseload system could work through strong interconnection, some smart grids and the like.

http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/publications/reports/Battle-of-the-grids/

Sure. Most European scenarios implicitly or explicitly assume high energy savings. Increases in electricity, but overall energy savings. In part due to carbon pricing, but also due to efficiencies (which is obviously related to price too).

I think the GP study is a report of a study commissioned from an institute, so they're generally fairly trustworthy when done that way. I've been involved in similar projects (not with GP), and they tend to be pretty rigorous.

People often lament how things have gotten much worse since some previous point, or think that they live in particularly unique times.

Do you think that politics in the UK is particularly different now? Or is it by and large the same as when you started your career?